this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
647 points (99.2% liked)

News

35821 readers
2156 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

problem is you could never prove beyond all reasonable doubt he didn't believe it himself

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's because he really does believe it. If you listen to him say he heard it on TV it is the most genuine statement he has ever made. It's like a child telling you exactly what they saw on TV.

If you're looking for someone to sue it would have to be the "sources" Trump heard the information from. Unfortunately I'm confident those people understand the ruse. They know to say allegedly. They know how to utilize weasel words.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh man. "I saw it on TV!". Exact same intonation my 4yo used when he saw a "trailer" for Mario Movie 2 when actually it was just some junk a highschool kid threw together in iMovie. Totally belief and innocent ignorance.

It's at that moment I realized that Trump isn't just a useful idiot. He's the perfect useful idiot.

Like a part of me thinks that Trump might actually believe in Santa and that he looks an awful lot like that guy in the power tool show and sounds an awful lot like Buzz Lightyear.

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

He's the Star Trek Mirror Universe version of Chauncy Gardener.

[–] Tja@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The "sources" is Vance the previous day in a rally.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Of course. He saw Vance say it on TV so it must be true.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

problem is you could never prove beyond all reasonable doubt he didn't believe it himself

Sounds like a candidate for a proper psych evaluation, then.

[–] paf0@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He has the best brain. The greatest brain. One time, for some unknown reason, he took a cognitive test meant for dementia patients. He supposedly passed but he claimed it was hard for him. Such a stable genius.

[–] leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Person.
Woman.
Man.
Camera.
TV.

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The amazing thing about that idiocy mostly flew under the radar at the time:

According to neurologists, in the test he was bragging about (aside from being extremely easy because it’s meant to screen for dementia), those would not have been the words.

The point of the 5 words portion is that the words are never related, because that would defeat the purpose of the memory test. They’re always carefully selected unrelated words, like daisy clock giraffe piano door.

He very obviously did not remember the words and was just naming things he could literally see at the time.

[–] leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 1 year ago

He very obviously did not remember the words and was just naming things he could literally see at the time.

Exactly.

[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

His niece, Mary Trump, knows him well and is a licensed clinical psychologist. She’s spoken and written extensively on his mental disorders (normally a psychologist won’t do that publicly, but she’s said he’s such a danger to the nation, she feels she has no choice).

She’s well worth reading and listening to.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

And she's not the only person in his family tree that is speaking out against the orange menace.

[–] colmear@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

aNOthEr aTtAcK oN oUR rIGHtful LEaDer bY thE wOkE mOb

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In legal speak the term is "knew or should have known"

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

is that actually the bar for slander? interesting

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's just the phrasing that lawyers always use because it's difficult to prove that someone actually knew something. So even if the person denies they knew it wasn't one hundred percent true you can still make the argument that they should have known it wasn't true. Although, you cant always be sued for defamation about a group of people. It depends on the laws in that state