Fox News' Chris Wallace interview with Trump was insane

I find the semantics to be kind of insane. No, Biden never said he wants to "defund" the police, he wants to divert funds away from law enforcement, which is apparently totally different.


"Interviews with 54 Democratic National Committee members, convention superdelegates and members of a criminal justice task force convened by Mr. Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders found a near-unanimous sentiment that local governments should redirect more money toward social services, education and mental health agencies."

And people say FOX is shilling for him, when they can't even be bothered to get it right? And if I can't trust them on that point, why would I trust them on any of the other points? This is exactly the kind of thing that flipped me from not being able to vote for him in 2016, to voting a straight GOP ticket this November.

That wasn't an interview, it was a hit piece and a challenge.
 
Last edited:

Meicyn

Member
He definitely didn’t do himself any favors. It was standard Chris Wallace, but Trump went in unprepared and it shows. Responses were the usual mish-mash of weasel words and little in the way of specifics. These were all easy questions for anyone who’s worth a damn.

Part of the problem is that Trump has surrounded himself with yes men. Most of the folks who were willing to tell him no resigned or were fired.

The Roman emperor Tiberius referred to the Senate as men “fit to be slaves” with regard to how they wouldn’t stand up for themselves and sought only to curry favor. Quite frankly, the American Senate and the President’s cabinet is not all that different in that regard.
 

Clout

Member
He definitely didn’t do himself any favors. It was standard Chris Wallace, but Trump went in unprepared and it shows. Responses were the usual mish-mash of weasel words and little in the way of specifics. These were all easy questions for anyone who’s worth a damn.

Part of the problem is that Trump has surrounded himself with yes men. Most of the folks who were willing to tell him no resigned or were fired.

The Roman emperor Tiberius referred to the Senate as men “fit to be slaves” with regard to how they wouldn’t stand up for themselves and sought only to curry favor. Quite frankly, the American Senate and the President’s cabinet is not all that different in that regard.
I echo what you've said, he went in unprepared and thought that the interview would be an easy ride because as you've said, he's surrounded himself with yes men and for that, he didn't have substantial answers. This interview was a losing battle for him.
 
And what do the polls mean, when all the polls were wrong in 2016? The way I see it, this thread kind of proves we are not all living in the same shared reality. What you folks see as him stumbling and stammering, I see him as reacting to being talked over and not allowed to answer any questions before being challenged on the answer, before it's even given.

What you folks see as him being stupid and aggressive, I see has him not allowing Wallace to walk all over him. I would say I'm a clear minority, but I don't think that's true. I'm a clear minority here, that's speaking openly. I'm not sure that's true of everyone everywhere, or even of everyone here that simply isn't speaking.

We shall see what happens come November. He had no chance, er, a 2% chance then. Back then I did not vote for him, but because off all the irrational hate thrown at him, I am going to vote for him, and I promise I'm not the only one like that. I'm not that special or unique. Can you imagine what would have happened if anyone had tried to talk over Obama like that? Not allowed him to give an answer before challenging that answer?

I know I can, and it would have been a media blood bath. That person would have been shamed out of existence by the rest of the media. And I guarantee, I'm not the only one that sees it.
 
Last edited:

Meicyn

Member
You’re right, we don’t share the same reality. Wallace refutes factually false information and you see it as Trump not being able to answer his questions when Wallace is responding to wrong information such as when Trump claimed the United States has the lowest mortality rate. We don’t. It’s not up for debate. Using that as evidence that we’re doing fine in our coronavirus response is bullshit when it’s not true, and Wallace is right to call him out. This isn’t North Korea, when the state lies, you call it out.

Then you bring up Obama for some reason like he never was talked over. Took a whopping moment for me to find an interview that shows otherwise.


And you know what came of that interview? Nothing. O’Reilly challenged Obama as he should, and the world moved on. The difference between the two Presidents is that, agree with him or not, Obama could respond with detailed answers and specifics. Trump is incapable of that. Christ, watching Trump fumble softball questions from Hannity such as “what’s your agenda for your next term as President” where the President starts rambling is infuriating. It’s scary that the guy cannot form a coherent answer and do something as simple as say “in my next term as President, I will eliminate Obamacare for good” or something equivalent.

Irrational hate for Trump? There is some of that, yes. Those left wing psychos who were screeching on inauguration day were annoying. But there is a lot of hate for Trump that is most certainly rational. I think his isolationist policies are shortsighted, 18th century thinking that is out of touch with the modern world. He has diminished American soft power which has allowed for increased Russian and Chinese influence in the world, and we are all worse off for it. His coronavirus response has been absolute shit as evidenced by 130+ thousand dead, his continuing claims that it’s gonna be gone any day now. His reappropriating defense funds for that stupid wall that he claimed Mexico was going to pay for is a waste of resources. I can go on and on.
 
You’re right, we don’t share the same reality. Wallace refutes factually false information and you see it as Trump not being able to answer his questions when Wallace is responding to wrong information such as when Trump claimed the United States has the lowest mortality rate. We don’t. It’s not up for debate. Using that as evidence that we’re doing fine in our coronavirus response is bullshit when it’s not true, and Wallace is right to call him out. This isn’t North Korea, when the state lies, you call it out.

Then you bring up Obama for some reason like he never was talked over. Took a whopping moment for me to find an interview that shows otherwise.


And you know what came of that interview? Nothing. O’Reilly challenged Obama as he should, and the world moved on. The difference between the two Presidents is that, agree with him or not, Obama could respond with detailed answers and specifics. Trump is incapable of that. Christ, watching Trump fumble softball questions from Hannity such as “what’s your agenda for your next term as President” where the President starts rambling is infuriating. It’s scary that the guy cannot form a coherent answer and do something as simple as say “in my next term as President, I will eliminate Obamacare for good” or something equivalent.

Irrational hate for Trump? There is some of that, yes. Those left wing psychos who were screeching on inauguration day were annoying. But there is a lot of hate for Trump that is most certainly rational. I think his isolationist policies are shortsighted, 18th century thinking that is out of touch with the modern world. He has diminished American soft power which has allowed for increased Russian and Chinese influence in the world, and we are all worse off for it. His coronavirus response has been absolute shit as evidenced by 130+ thousand dead, his continuing claims that it’s gonna be gone any day now. His reappropriating defense funds for that stupid wall that he claimed Mexico was going to pay for is a waste of resources. I can go on and on.
yes, he challenged him, but he let him answer, then challenged the answers. Wallace was challenging Trump while he was still answering the question. But again, we shall look to November to see what people are thinking about all this.
 

Meicyn

Member
yes, he challenged him, but he let him answer, then challenged the answers. Wallace was challenging Trump while he was still answering the question. But again, we shall look to November to see what people are thinking about all this.
Are you honestly going to sit here and tell me that Trump was unable to get his answers out?
 
Are you honestly going to sit here and tell me that Trump was unable to get his answers out?
Are you honestly going to deny the difference in tone and professionalism between O'Riely interviewing Obama Vs Wallace interviewing Trump? Or that one interview was not even 10 min, while the other was over 40?
 

Meicyn

Member
Are you honestly going to deny the difference in tone and professionalism between O'Riely interviewing Obama Vs Wallace interviewing Trump? Or that one interview was not even 10 min, while the other was over 40?
Who cares?

No, seriously. What is your underlying point, exactly? How is it that Trump is always being picked on, no matter the scenario?

I don’t care if the tone is different. Chris Wallace is a boilerplate journalist who pushed back against a President who spouted blatantly false information mid-answer. If you’re going to formulate answers based on false information, you should absolutely be called out on it.

I find it fascinating that you have a bigger problem with Wallace being rude, than Trump peddling outright fabricated information.
 
Because I don't trust the information is outright fabricated. I don't trust anybody on anything really, because of the insane amount of hate and backlash. Because of 3 + years of false Russian collusion nonsense. Anything anyone says is automatically suspect.

You have Facebook fact checking a meme that says "The only reason the US is the only country with a second wave of Covid is because the US is the only country with a consented effort to oust a leader in a few months"

They are calling that false, because many nations are facing the "possibility" of a second wave of covid. It's weasel words like that that make me trust nobody. Sure, ANYTHING is "possible", but what other nation actually is having a second wave, like we are having a second wave?

Plus, it's a damn opinion, it's not true or false, it's an opinion...

They fact that all the institutions are working overtime to do this kind of garbage, has me trusting nothing any of them say.

And, you ask who cares, but that disparity was my point, and you offered that clip as a counter point. But when you could't defend it, you ask, who cares?

Really?
 

Meicyn

Member
Because I don't trust the information is outright fabricated. I don't trust anybody on anything really, because of the insane amount of hate and backlash. Because of 3 + years of false Russian collusion nonsense. Anything anyone says is automatically suspect.
I like how your post contradicts itself. You don’t trust anybody on anything, but you have determined that the Russian collusion debacle is false. Based on information. From other people.

More accurate to say that you don’t trust information from anyone that says anything negative about the President, but are at the ready to ingest information that supports him. Perhaps you see a little of yourself in the President, perhaps living vicariously through him. Perhaps you dislike him being attacked on multiple fronts, because an attack on him is an attack on you. It certainly would explain your rush to defend him at every opportunity.


You have Facebook fact checking a meme that says "The only reason the US is the only country with a second wave of Covid is because the US is the only country with a consented effort to oust a leader in a few months"

They are calling that false, because many nations are facing the "possibility" of a second wave of covid. It's weasel words like that that make me trust nobody. Sure, ANYTHING is "possible", but what other nation actually is having a second wave, like we are having a second wave?
Oh god, Facebook. I don’t have Facebook because it’s a trash platform, so I have to work around this limitation. Is that truly the reason they are calling it false? Or is that your reason? And does this matter? Seriously asking here.


Plus, it's a damn opinion, it's not true or false, it's an opinion...

They fact that all the institutions are working overtime to do this kind of garbage, has me trusting nothing any of them say.
Opinions are not inherently free of scrutiny.

“I like strawberries” is a simple opinion that is a big whatever.

”The sun rises because the rooster crowed” is a factually incorrect statement and arguing that “it’s an opinion” doesn’t give one immunity from scrutiny.


And, you ask who cares, but that disparity was my point, and you offered that clip as a counter point. But when you could't defend it, you ask, who cares?

Really?
So that is your point? That Chris Wallace is rude? That’s it? So people are rude to the President, everyone is picking on the President, so you’re going to vote for him in retaliation.

You do you, man.
 
No, The lack of evidence, is why I deem it false. If you have the evidence, I'll be glad to hear it. But if Muller couldn't find it after 3 years, good look with that.
 

Meicyn

Member
No, The lack of evidence, is why I deem it false. If you have the evidence, I'll be glad to hear it. But if Muller couldn't find it after 3 years, good look with that.
How would you know there was a lack of evidence? That’s second hand information. How can you trust anybody? I mean, that’s your default position, right?

Hence why I say that you ingest information that supports what you want, and disparage or refuse information as untrustworthy if it goes against.
 
Also, insofar as the scrutiny of opinions... Did you find another country having a second wave like we are having a second wave? Or did it come down to the weasel word covering their "fact checking"?
 

Meicyn

Member
I don’t care? No, seriously. I really don’t. I’m not in the business of fighting over stupid Facebook memes. That’s Facebook’s prerogative.

Poor President Trump, everyone’s picking on him.

Here’s what I do care about. Saving American lives. The President is finally onboard with wearing a mask and is setting an example via Twitter. Poorly handled, but it’s better late than never. Only took 130000 dead Americans. Good job Mr. President?
 
Didn't "they" originally tell us not to go out and get masks?

But never mind that, never mind you are trusting the same people that have changed their minds over and again. Never mind that covid is a NOVEL virus we've known about for less than a year, meaning we still don't actually know anything yet.

You trust what and who you want. As will I. But I will note you've tried to make challenges, and when they have been shown to be bunk challenges, you've said you don't care about it anyway. That says something, I'll let others decide what it says.
 

Empire

Member
I'm absolutely convinced we are all living in a real-life Twilight Zone movie playing out on some alien civilization's movie screen with a 15% rotten tomatoes rating. Anyone have a spreadsheet of this one with Trump’s “facts” vs. Chris Wallace’s vs. a researched and cited fact check? A lot of claims and arguments in this one and a few validations of statements. When politicians speak false information, it’s called propaganda, so it would be great to see how much propaganda was produced in this interview.
 

valen

Member
I don’t care? No, seriously. I really don’t. I’m not in the business of fighting over stupid Facebook memes. That’s Facebook’s prerogative.

Poor President Trump, everyone’s picking on him.

Here’s what I do care about. Saving American lives. The President is finally onboard with wearing a mask and is setting an example via Twitter. Poorly handled, but it’s better late than never. Only took 130000 dead Americans. Good job Mr. President?

That's a double standard argument when the blue team was against Trump's travel ban against China.

Read THE SARS EPIDEMIC AND ITS AFTERMATH IN CHINA: A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE - Learning from SARS - NCBI Bookshelf
Year 2002/2003 CCP government handled SARS-CoV outbreak better than the year 2019/2020 CCP government.

COVID-19 = SARS-CoV-2.
 
Top Bottom