Cool unsourced/debunked fabrication from a literal tabloid, took me all of two minutes to find this, after looking for an actual source, when the OP-linked article didn’t have one:
Well I hope you’re right. After reading your comment I went to check sources for this story on Ground News. The original source sense to be a paywalled article in The Times which I can’t read. There are many other sources but they’re not what you’d call top tier, and they may all be feeding off each other (see screenshot below). So yes, there seems to be hope that this is false.
Oh well newsweek says that the biggest pack of liars the world has ever seen says they won’t do it. Nothing to worry about folks!
Trump’s transition team denied that any decisions on the issue had been made. Spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told Newsweek that the unnamed sources “are speculating and have no idea what they are actually talking about.”
“No decisions on this issue have been made. No policy should ever be deemed official unless it comes directly from President Trump or his authorized spokespeople,” she said.
Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. For shame.
Is it confirmation bias when I know Trump and his team are gigantic liars so I’m not quite going to rule out this very-on-brand policy that they are pre-denying until he’s in office and it doesn’t happen?
MTG believes they are going to do it according to the same article, but I acknowledge she’s got the brainpower of a squirrel, so I’m not putting much stock in that.
Dunno man, pattern seeking is the one thing we’re really good at. All aspects of it are on brand - including the likelihood that saying today that there are no plans to do so is absolutely unrelated to whether there are plans to do so.
I find the claim he will do this to be absolutely no less credible than the claim he won’t.
But, it doesn’t matter what I believe or what they say right now, he’s not in office. If he thinks it makes him more powerful to do so, he’ll do it when he gets in, regardless of what they are saying now and regardless of whether they are lying currently. I have no doubt of that.
The pattern is that it fits in perfectly with Trumps overall positioning and past policies, and lying about it fits past behavior also.
This argument matters not at all though, as I said before. I can’t even run back here to claim victory if he does it (not that I would anyhow) because:
If he thinks it makes him more powerful to do so, he’ll do it when he gets in, regardless of what they are saying now and regardless of whether they are lying currently. I have no doubt of that.
Cool unsourced/debunked fabrication from a literal tabloid, took me all of two minutes to find this, after looking for an actual source, when the OP-linked article didn’t have one:
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-reported-transgender-military-plan-called-out-charity-1991052
Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. For shame.
Well I hope you’re right. After reading your comment I went to check sources for this story on Ground News. The original source sense to be a paywalled article in The Times which I can’t read. There are many other sources but they’re not what you’d call top tier, and they may all be feeding off each other (see screenshot below). So yes, there seems to be hope that this is false.
Oh well newsweek says that the biggest pack of liars the world has ever seen says they won’t do it. Nothing to worry about folks!
Is it confirmation bias when I know Trump and his team are gigantic liars so I’m not quite going to rule out this very-on-brand policy that they are pre-denying until he’s in office and it doesn’t happen?
MTG believes they are going to do it according to the same article, but I acknowledge she’s got the brainpower of a squirrel, so I’m not putting much stock in that.
believe every negative thing you hear about him/them without the slightest bit of scrutiny/skepticism?
Yes.
Dunno man, pattern seeking is the one thing we’re really good at. All aspects of it are on brand - including the likelihood that saying today that there are no plans to do so is absolutely unrelated to whether there are plans to do so.
I find the claim he will do this to be absolutely no less credible than the claim he won’t.
But, it doesn’t matter what I believe or what they say right now, he’s not in office. If he thinks it makes him more powerful to do so, he’ll do it when he gets in, regardless of what they are saying now and regardless of whether they are lying currently. I have no doubt of that.
It’s not pattern recognition when the event within the ‘recognized pattern’ is made up, lmao.
The pattern is that it fits in perfectly with Trumps overall positioning and past policies, and lying about it fits past behavior also.
This argument matters not at all though, as I said before. I can’t even run back here to claim victory if he does it (not that I would anyhow) because: