Sanders Under Fire Over Conflicting Trump Tweets

SarahHuckabeeSandersContradictions in the statements coming from the Trump White House have become an increasingly difficult subject for the White House briefings where Press Secretary Sarah Sanders is often tasked with denying obviously false statements.  Sanders has developed a maddening cadence where she simply repeats an answer to another question or restates an obviously unresponsive answer. That pattern was on display Monday where Sanders simply said that President Donald Trump was speaking truthfully when he made two demonstrably contradicting statements about supporting one of the immigration bills in Congress.

On Wednesday, Trump tweeted “HOUSE REPUBLICANS SHOULD PASS THE STRONG BUT FAIR IMMIGRATION BILL, KNOWN AS GOODLATTE II.”  However, when the immigration bill stalled in Congress, Trump tweeted the following “I never pushed the Republicans in the House to vote for the Immigration Bill, either GOODLATTE 1 or 2, because it could never have gotten enough Democrats as long as there is the 60 vote threshold.”

 

Matt Nussbaum of Politico asked Sanders “Why would the president lie about something like that?”

Sanders responded, “He didn’t. The president has talked all along, we’ve laid out the priorities and the principles that we support, that we wanted to see reflected in legislation. But at the same time the president wasn’t aggressively lobbying members, because he knew that democrats in Senate still were unwilling to actually come to the table.”

After the word “didn’t” the answer veered off into the ether. The fact is that Trump did call for the passage of Goodlatte II and then later said that he did not push for its passage.

There is a legitimate concern over a White House which denies clearly established facts and does not attempt even a plausible explanation.  It is possible that Trump could claim that he did not actively lobby Congress but he clearly did push for passage in his public statements.  The utter disregard shown over such contradictions is deeply concerning for the public and deeply damaging for the Administration.

196 thoughts on “Sanders Under Fire Over Conflicting Trump Tweets”

    1. Nutty Youtube videos are always welcome because, let’s face it, these days we all need a good laugh.

      Thanks Autumn!

  1. How many little dramas start with “the President TWEETED today…”

    From the perspective of the history of communications, I think that Obama and Trump broke new ground in social media, with Trump personally TWEETING directly to the American people. Trump communicates in a stream of consciousness way, often creating difficulties for himself while also maintaining a very direct line of communication with the people. This is exactly why Administrations employ vast armies of staff to craft and vet every single word the office ever utters. They have dedicated staff who just do phrase checks all day, to ensure nothing is accidentally plagiarized or copied or even sounds too similar to someone else.

    I imagine that future Administrations will learn from these mistakes, and create a similar team of staffers to check social media posts. When you are in upper management of a corporation, let alone the entire country, you should always think very carefully about every word you release. It is helpful to have other sets of eyes proofread statements for accuracy and keep you from creating a mess.

    Trump would have been better served following the example of Ronald Reagen. When the media would point out he made a mistake he would pause, think about it, and say, yep, you got me. Sorry about that. You own and get in front of your mistakes. When you deny it or obfuscate, you turn a little problem into a big one. Why pour gasoline on a candle flame? Is he going to try to belabor the point that one TWEET wasn’t putting much effort into pushing the bill? Because that’s splitting hairs. If he wants to say that he didn’t campaign for it, but just made his wishes known, then say that. Or say, you know, I’m splitting hairs. You’re right. I wanted it to pass and should have tried harder. Or whatever. But obfuscation does not play well.

      1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – so, you don’t know how to tweet. Well, technology is for the young, David.

        1. Since you can’t find stuff on your own, go ask your local reference librarian.

          What an ignoramus.

          1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – I have pointed you to the reference librarians at the library at the university, but you have not taken advantage of them yet.

              1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – Neither, only YOU can do it. Only YOU know the right definition in the OED, only YOU know which source you used. You seem to be the one who is either too lazy, stupid or incompetent.

                  1. David Benson owes me five citations (one from the OED) and the source of a quotation, after six weeks – David, you know I am right. So, are you too lazy, too incompetent or too stupid to do it?

  2. People are darn funny… I find it extremely comical how some folks now want to hold politicians and press secretaries accountable for “untruthfulness”…

    I have two words for those folks… “Jay Carney”

  3. Wouldn’t it be great if the media simply made a commitment to report the truth and let their audience do their own thinking to determine if they like it or not? So in this case, the President’s tweets would be the truth and an honest reporter would ask questions for clarity, so they can then report the truth.

    One more thing, have there been any sustained efforts by the MSM to report the positive results stemming from this administration’s agenda?

    1. When a president is constantly busted for falsehoods that should be reported in prominent news space. This notion that the truth shouldn’t matter or that MSM is lying for reporting the lies is inexcusable.

      1. I recall there once was a time when politicians spoke, especially the President, and reporters reported the facts. The actual analysis of what was said, what was meant, interpreting the facts, well that was not done by the flatfoot reporter. Today, everyone is an expert, including the the consumer of the biased reporting.

        I never take what is said by a politician as the truth, at least not the whole truth. That means I expect what they are saying to be deceptive and and at times deceitful. I’ve been in Sales for nearly 20 years, and politicians are salespeople. They are the worst sort of salespeople because they seem to never lose…personally.

        1. Well Olly it sounds like you’re just totally cynical and you cynically expect everyone else to be.

          1. I’m more of a pragmatist. I believe human nature has never changed. This creates a dilemma; how do we empower others to govern without enabling the darker side of their nature? The obvious answer is to give them only limited power and then expect them to try and take more than they were provided. So how did we get to where we are today? By politicians selling the idea that they are to be trusted and the real threat to the people (voters) are other people.

            Well Olly it sounds like you’re just totally cynical and you cynically expect everyone else to be.

            Just the opposite Peter. I expect everyone to follow their own nature. Tribalism, herd mentality, whatever you want to call it is real. It takes pressure off of people to have to do the hard work of thinking critically. As long as my life, liberty and property are at risk, then I will look at everyone in this administrative state as a thief and a liar and only be pleasantly surprised when they prove otherwise.

  4. If you’re going to be the spokesman for a liar, you’ll have to lie. And she is. So she does.

          1. Yes, but it fits for all politicians. Frankly, Trump has “lied” less to the American public than other Presidents. Look at what Trump promised during the election and look at what he has accomplished and keeps trying to accomplish. Then look at the election promises of other Presidents. Trump has been the most honest.

            1. Whatsboutism, kellyanne pivot. It looks good on you though. Pro tip: don’t follow the shiny ball under the couch. Pravda Faux News isn’t trying to inform you.

              This is to “relevance, schmelivance; maybe iffen we post prattle, they’ll forget for a second he’s a lying imbecile” allan

              1. Hi Mark, welcome back. Tomorrow is the fourth of July so go ahead and bring out your well worn red flag and sickle. Then you can go back to your hole.

              2. Whatsboutism, kellyanne pivot.

                Have Marky Mark and Nutchacha ever been seen in the same room?

            2. LOLOL. Not sure why you put the word lied in quotes. But Trump lies all the time. No quotes.

              1. “But Trump lies all the time. ”

                That is your opinion. I probably put the word lies in quotes because too many have misused the word.

                1. Trump lies like he thinks it’s his job description.

                  I thought Bill Clinton would never be eclipsed as a Presidential liar but Trump makes Slick Willy look like a choirboy.

                  1. Wildbill, you might expect Presidents to always tell the truth but that is impossible. You wouldn’t want them too. The question is whether they are lying, puffing, have a difference of opinion etc. I don’t think Trump lies to any great degree. I don’t know that Clinton as President lied that much either except for his sexual escapades which were criminal. Obama lied a lot. Virtually every President lies and many times those lies are necessary. Even your mother lied to you when you were a kid. Most of the complaints are purely political and are used because those using them don’t have any other arguments to make. They can’t even quote the lies and when they do most of the times their complaints are wrongly made or trivial.

                    Most of what Trump does is puffery (exaggerated or false praise). You might want to consider them lies but if puffery was lying all the advertisers, promoters, etc. would be put in jail.

                  2. Wild Bill,…
                    Finally! Trump opponent WB finally concedes that Trump excels at something.
                    Was that so damn difficult?😊😄

        1. Come on Allan, you didn’t get the memo?

          This article is about Sanders and Trump. That’s the content.

          You are not allowed to to be a non-conformist and inject alternative ideas into discussions like these. It’s bad enough President Trump has wiped out Obama’s legacy accomplishments, Now you want to destroy his base by forcing them to do some critical-thinking. That’s just mean.

          1. Yes, Olly its mean especially since I am asking some on the left to start thinking critically. I read and listen to a lot from the left wing media solely to keep up with the crazies. I say let the MSM do what they do best, lie and use innuendo. The lies are starting to hurt the left which is fracturing, splintering off some of the young voters who believe communism is a great system. We need to send our youngsters to Venezuela to teach them about politics and take the empty university housing and place illegal aliens into those units and have the students take care of them.

          1. PCS likes blurred lines and non-sequiturs — these are his stock in trade.

            This allows him to present his supposed cleverness as he skates to the sidelines.

            The man is a coward hiding behind redundant thoughts.

            1. WWAS – could you point out where I have been redundant? Could you also explain “skates to the sidelines”? BTW, I am not supposedly clever, I am clever. 😉

    1. If you’re going to be the spokesman for a liar, you’ll have to lie.

      Is that a question on the LSAT or Bar Exam?

      If you’re going to be the spokesman for a liar, you’ll have to:
      a. Lie all the time.
      b. Lie occasionally.
      c. Increase your fee.
      d. Run for political office.

      1. OLLY – I think it is on the multi-state bar exam and the correct answer is none of the above. Which is not on the test. 🙂

  5. Fake News, now buy my Burmese ties and Bangladeshi dress-shirts. Tremendous success, very fantastic.

      1. This fits here as well; funny how the wackjobs parrot the same nonsense.

        Whatsboutism, kellyanne pivot. It looks good on you though. Pro tip: don’t follow the shiny ball under the couch. Pravda Faux News isn’t trying to inform you.

        This is to “ya, he’s a traitorous liar, but at least he’s an old white guy” kurtzie

  6. Trump has a lot of leeway to lie since the mainstream press has been lying their butts off for decades about many major topics and not just some petty details. I rather enjoy hearing him fib sometimes. Serves them right, drives them crazy.

  7. FALSEHOODS COULD END THIS PRESIDENCY BEFORE THE RUSSIA PROBE

    Consumers of mainstream media have known for at least two years that Donald Trump keeps tweeting and uttering falsehoods. Only days ago The Toronto Star published a story noting that Trump had uttered a record 103 falsehoods in a single week; about 15 per day. Falsehoods at that level are like an air raid siren warning us of something profoundly wrong.

    Though in all fairness to Trump, not every falsehood is a lie. Quite often Trump has no grasp of facts. Therefore he tries to ‘wing it’ by uttering whatever narrative sounds right to him. And being a devoted of viewer of Fox News, Trump might echo talking points they put forth; a habit which has led to embarrassing contradictions. Fox misinforms the president who parrots what he heard. This condition has been referred to as ‘closed-loop feedback’.

    A president who utters falsehoods on a routine basis can’t possibly be good. In a worst case scenario Trump is a stooge for Vladimir Putin gas-lighting America. ‘The Truth Is A Lie And Lies Are Now The Truth’, could best describe this approach. And Trump’s constant attacks on the media seem to confirm the worst.

    At the very least, Trump is woefully ignorant of facts. Trump could, in fact, be suffering from the early stages of dementia. That could possibly explain why his facts are never straight. But whether Trump is a stooge for Putin or suffering from calcified brain matter, his occupation of the White House is a danger to the world. No man unmoored from the truth should have his hands on the levers of power.

    I predict that some day, in the not-too distant future, Trump is going to tweet or utter something so insanely untrue that right-wing media won’t know how to spin it. At that point Trump’s presidency screeches to a halt. While a national conversation develops regarding his mental state. And again, right-wing media could find itself helpless to stop the conversation. World leaders and corporate CEO’s may join the discussion. At that point Trump’s resignation will be the only logical endpoint.

    1. Hi. thanks for the long comment. Here is what we will do when Trump tweets something stupid: ignore it. That’s what appeals judges do a lot of times when they see serious error that they don’t want to reverse or write about. they just ignore it. life is full of that kind of thing and the left wingers hate it except when they are doing it to people they don’t like. well, turnabout is fair play

        1. Peter, a great American once called that defining deviancy down….
          I believe that fits Trump to a T.

    2. Peter Shill being the expert Shill is should recognize the difference between puffing, rounding errors, differences of opinion, etc but he is ignorant. That is what constitutes most of Peter Shill’s so-called lies. Facts are difficult to understand so Peter Shill seldom uses facts preferring innuendo. He likes to repeat the lies of others and should turn off CNN which engages in outright lies.

      Taking the first reported lie: “You know, we signed an agreement. It said we will begin the immediate denuclearization. OK? Of North Korea.” It is not a lie since North Korea actually destroyed one of its nuclear sites. Is North Korea being honest? No one knows, but instead of heightening the friction between the two nations he is trying to facilitate an agreement. At the same time, Trump is continuing to isolate North Korea while the left so worried that Trump might succeed seems to be doing everything in its power to destroy any possible deal.

      1. Puffing and rounding errors belong in real estate. Not the White House. You can’t deal with the truth, Allan. You’re what’s known as aggressively ignorant.

        1. Peter Shill, I am a realist. I have stated before my feelings about all Presidents including Trump. You are nothing more than a Shill and that is how you got your name. Rounding errors are disastrous in a real estate deal. Rounding errors in casual talk are the usual. I provided you with the first quote from your source and demonstrated why your source lied and therefore your statement was a lie. You just can’t deal with the facts. Keep Shilling along singing a song…

          I love Patsy Cline.

          1. Well, Allan, it would seem you are not the thinker you want everyone to see you as.

            You use another’s replacement for Peter’s surname too much for such a supposedly clever lad as you.

            Additionally, you speak of errors as if all were honest oversights of misbegotten words — fighting the tides of obvious obfuscations.

            You continually sound like a dick, where your arguments present insults instead of the facts you put other’s to task for.

              1. What a brilliant reply.

                It’s funny how when you are beholden to your claimed intellectual standards that you are the first to scream from the gutter.

                It’s hilarious, really.

                I would stop the pretense you present here, Allan; and just admit that you are a unschooled, vindictive idiot.

                1. WWAS there is no way to deal with you in an intellectual fashion. That would presume you have an intellect, but we already know from this post and others that you don’t.

      2. My, my — Allan still shilling for himself as a great thinker.

        Yet, look at his post — the first paragraph is nothing but insults.

        The second is full of his opinion — which he disparages others from using.

        Allan is a bombastic fool; though not at the level of PCS.

          1. What an irksome troll you are, Allan.

            Grade school responses.

            What happened to the logical and factual arguments you claim to uphold?

            You live in the gutter, though you pretend not to; but at the first hint of anyone not agreeing with you — you throw the gutter swill you wallow in.

            You see yourself as some great arbitrator of logic — I see no evidence of this.

            This is why I’m here, Allan — to point this out. It has been consistent from your first post on this blog.

            1. WWAS, it sounds as if your psychiatrist isn’t good at managing your anger management problems. You can keep yelling and screaming all you want but that only kills your voice and your ears. When you starting your head against the wall dial 911.

              1. What a great sixth-grade response.

                I’m laughing, Allan — not yelling and screaming — at you and your feints of courage surrounded by adolescent responses and verbiage.

                You might have surpassed PCS as the biggest blowhard here. Time will tell.

                1. No WWAS you are not laughing. You are seething while yelling and screaming internally and anyone reading what you write can easily see that.

                  Seethe away old chap.

                2. WWAS – did I touch you in your private place? Is that why you go after me all the time? Really, you are spinning your wheels, you are not funny or clever. Just wasting space on the blog. BTW, you do have something wrong with you, either mental or physical that is causing this level of venom. I would suggest a full workup by your GP and tell them you have an anger management problem. There are groups for this or drugs. Or maybe it is something that needs to be cured.

          1. Another irksome post from someone who needs to get out more.

            It really impresses me, SOT/DSS/NII/TSTD, that you have so much time on your hands.

            1. “so much time on your hands”

              WWAS it sounds that along with anger management you need someone to help you with time management. You have a lot of problems. Do you want to talk about them?

              1. Your such a fool to think my responses to you encompass anger.

                I’m here for the laughs. You, PCS, and SOT/DSS/NII/TSTD are hilarious.

                Your hypocrisy knows no bounds — it is exceptional in its fervor — and it’s wonderfully hilarious to read the words of someone when they have exceeded their ability to formulate any thought.

                You might want to read some of your posts to see what anger reads like.

                1. WWAS – I want you to know that it is impossible for me to exceed my ability. Just had to put that out there.

                  Also, I am not angry. You do not deserve enough of my attention for me to be angry at you. The only person who deserves that attention is my wife and my siblings. You rise to bemuse. I am bemused by your comments about me.

                2. You are seething WWAS and you know it. It is obvious from reading what you write. One can’t deal with a person that is out of control so seethe away.

            2. WWAS – as Thumper Rabbit’s father said: “If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”

        1. WWAS – going for a two-fer. First insult Allan and then a drive-by insult of me. If it weren’t so sloppy, I would give you points for trying. However, I just can’t. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

            1. WWAS – thanks for the compliment. Be sure to tip your waitress. I will be here all week.

        1. Sure I am wildbill. Peter is a Shill and acts like one. I have an opinion that can be challenged and I will defend my opinion with facts. That is not Peter Shill’s modus operandi.

            1. I always think of the French Revolution and the guillotine when I think of Rousseau so I am not one of his fans. Was that statement correct for all circumstances? Of course not. What we have are insults and innuendo by those that have no argument and under those circumstances, Rousseau’s statement would be mostly correct. Insults appropriately used do not fit into Rousseau’s quip above and I believe Rousseau would agree.

              If you don’t agree Peter Shill is a Shill, that is your problem. If you think my arguments are wrong, challenge them and we can have a bit of a debate on a higher plane than one can have with a Shill. If you wish not to deal on that level you can go sit with Peter Shill.

              1. If you’re capable of arguing without the grade school insults, which I firmly believe, why don’t you?
                The insults reflect badly upon you and advance your opinions not one bit.

                1. BTW, Rousseau was dead almost 11 years to the day that the Bastille fell, which is generally accepted as the start of the French Revolution. I’m not sure we can fairly lay blame for the revolution’s excesses upon his head.

                2. Wildbill, I do as I have done with you but once I see a person shifting to low gear I reply in kind. There is no debate possible with that type of person. Take note of the comments made towards our President and how those statements are inferred onto his supporters. It’s simple to note. Just listen to the agreement from Hillary’s supporters on the “deplorables” and expand that to what you hear on this blog. I don’t hear your moderator’s voice much trying to moderate the discussion elsewhere. Why is that?

                  “”The insults reflect badly upon you and advance your opinions not one bit.”

                  That is a bunch of hogwash that you should have gotten over in grade school. You are doing a dance and essentially pleasuring yourself. If you want to join the argument then go ahead and add to the substantive comments. I’ll welcome that but if you wish to indulge yourself in this type of self-gratitude leave me out.

          1. Allan, it seems that most of the words you type on this blog are not facts. Indeed, they seem to be opinion.

            Is it so difficult for you to see that?

            That you do the very same you accuse others of?

            You claim superiority of argument due to your diligence of rigorous standards — yet you fail to provide the same in your posts.

            You are a pretender; a charlatan, a snake oil presser.

            1. WWAS, I am glad you are not one of my fans. I try to stay clear of those that foul up a room instead of enlightening the discussion.

              I don’t know if you can understand the difference between opinion and fact. Next time you read one of Peter Shill’s postings why don’t you tell us what is opinion, fact or fiction. Let us see something more than this foul rhetoric you spew.

    3. “A president who utters falsehoods on a routine basis can’t possibly be good.”

      Well, Peter, what about a President who deliberately lied to the American people to get his policies through, which he knew would hurt them in the long run?

      If you like your health insurance, you can keep it. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. The Affordable Care Act will save American families on average $2500 a year. The ACA is bringing costs down for everyone, and critics are just Fox News folks.

      It was a video.

      Iran is no longer working on its nuclear program. (Actually, they send us a video now and then of their military facilities, claiming, see, no nukes! But you are not allowed to come inspect all of our military facilities).

      Vote for me, and the seas will stop rising and the temperatures will stop rising.

      Pigford (https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/breitbart-was-right-about-pigford-case/)

      More young black men are in prison than college. (wrong)

      We signed the biggest middle class tax cut in history. (wrong)

      90% of the deficit is Bush’s fault. The Bush tax cuts led to the Great Recession. (both thoroughly debunked)

      Capitol Hill janitors took a pay cut (not true)

      Or there was the sequester when he deliberately closed national monuments, like the one to vets, that are not manned in the first place, in order to deliberately hurt the American people.

      Denying calling ISIS the JV team.

      Republicans filibustered 500 pieces of legislation (Republicans blocked 50 bills, and he, as a Senator, also voted against ending debates.)

      The Keystone Pipeline is for oil that bypasses the United States – No, it was destined to refineries on the Gulf Coast. It also moved oil from North Dakota and Montana.

      We have fired a whole bunch of people who were in charge of those VA facilities. No. Only one executive was fired, and that was for ethics violations, not the wait times at the VA.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/19/obamas-biggest-whoppers/?utm_term=.919dfbfc8d48

      1. Mistakes and lies are all wrong. Your outrage is misplaced, however, considering the damage to the people that Obama’s lies wrought.

        Treat every President equally. The media gave an 8 year old pass on Obama’s and Hillary’s and DWS’s lies. All of a sudden, they found their conscience. It’s for political expediency.

        Everyone should be treated the same.

      2. Karen, I notice you don’t have any specific dates or places where these alleged like were told. Nor did you bother presenting any Fact-Checker reports confirming Obama’s alleged lies.

        1. No fact checks, no dates, just a laundry list from right-wing media that I’m supposed to recognize. Like that’s supposed to suffice for an intelligent rebuttal.

          There’s also a certain warped cynicism. Like, ‘Because Obama embellished the virtues of his healthcare act, that gives Trump a free-pass to utter any falsehood he desires’. That’s the kind of stupid false equivalency that comes from longterm viewing of Fox News.

          Just the other day I was debating a Trumper on Facebook who tried to put forth the most absurd argument. He said that because Brian Williams of NBC was caught lying, Trump gets a pass. Now again, only a longterm viewer of Fox News would think that kind of logic makes any sense whatsoever.

          1. Peter Hill – Obama and his administration set the standard for the rest of us to follow. Remember he was without scandal.

          2. “There’s also a certain warped cynicism. Like, ‘Because Obama embellished the virtues of his healthcare act, that gives Trump a free-pass to utter any falsehood he desires’.” Straw man argument I never made.

            I actually expressly stated that all lies are wrong and all Presidents should be treated equally. They aren’t. Obama got a pass for deliberately lying to the American people over and over again, to get policies through that harmed them. Trump gets called on every exaggeration. It is not equal treatment. I am not excusing Trump’s obfuscation, as my earlier post clearly argued he was utterly wrong. However, your statement that you believe that any President who is caught in a lie or misstatement is bad is also wrong, because you have expressed admiration for Obama. As I’ve pointed out, he told some pretty serious lies to our detriment.

            Obama did not “embellish the virtues of his healthcare act.” That is like claiming the ACA was going to be HUGE or JUST WONDERFUL when it was really only mediocre. He told deliberate lies about what would happen in order to get it to pass. It has been discovered that, in addition to the lies mentioned above, they also knew that it would drive up the cost of healthcare for the middle class. That is a deadly serious lie that caused financial and health hardships for the middle class.

            I want every person in public office or politics held to a higher standard, not just Republicans. Everyone. And that includes Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama and Hillary are now running resistance campaigns against Trump, but they both had serious dishonesty problems, I would say Hillary far worse than Obama.

        2. Hi Peter. These were all statements covered by the press. You can GOOGLE them and find a source that you are comfortable with. All were proven false.

          For instance, no one thinks Benghazi was a spontaneous protest about a video. And, of course, the Obamacare lies were headline news for years and he was forced to make a very clumsy retraction.

          But, if you actually open the article link in my comment, you can click on each statement to go to a Fact Checker page, with the date and exact text of each statement and a video where you can watch him saying it. Or you could research the veracity yourself.

Leave a Reply