debunked debunking
I go to a Fox News story covering the latest Biden ad — headline “Robert De Niro narrates Biden campaign ad with debunked or questionable claims about Trump”. Reading over the tight three paragraphs, the story describes two items in the ad as “debunked” or “questionable”, apparently deciding to ignore the rest of it. Trump recommending drinking bleach — apparently did not happen. This is one where I had to look it up to see what where huh, and I do see a fact check website mark this famous incident as “mostly false”, and then moving into the details of the famous incident all of which should move the claim over to the “mostly true” category. It hinges on the fact that he did not use the word “bleach”, though it did describe scientists as “horrified” at Trump’s comments. I am a little bit at a loss as to what to make of this categorizing. The desire to bend over backward The other reference the Fox News article described as out of context — “bloodshed” — the familiar “he was describing the auto industry” line. Putting it in the proper context, of course, is the line followed in a speech that begins as his campaign speeches do with a celebration of January 6 criminals. So in an immediate context they have some point, but it collapses in the slightly expanded context and even more in a broader still context. There is no plausible deniability.
There is one aspect of the Trump Libertarian Party speech, somewhere in the boo-ing and energy gained from such. He did give them a single promise — he is going to commute the sentence that one jackass, the dark web Silk Road guy, Ulbrictch — a cause no one outside of this political orbit cares about, and which strikes me as kind of just looking over a list and plucking something out. Transactional politics at its best. It is, I guess, more than Biden could give them — though I find it hard to see how it should counterweight the indifference at getting another three percent in lieu of hitching their ride with a supposed “winner”, the only other item Trump offered this party faithful and one which if it was of good concern would not have them sitting there.