I know where someone here gets their "debating" practice from.  The fake news today said the video shown to the S. African president was fake.  The reply from the WH was no, it's not fake and asked why the fake news thought it was fake.

The fake news reply was "because it is".  At no point did the fake news state any other reasoning besides "it's fake".  I mean, had they said "this vid is from X country and not S. Africa" or "This vid is CGI". But nope, all they said was "it's fake" because they deemed it so.  I'm surprised they didn't move goal post.

Independent journalist have been covering this for at least a year now with video proof.  Why the main stream media didn't cover this more shows their agenda.  Same fake news is silent about Islam in China.

Not about the video but about the photo he held up (regarding credibility)
https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/trumps-image-dead-white-farmers-came-reuters-footage-congo-not-south-africa-2025-05-22/

Not about the video but about the photo he held up (regarding credibility)
https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/trumps-image-dead-white-farmers-came-reuters-footage-congo-not-south-africa-2025-05-22/

Didnt click as poster has no "credibility". Havent clicked on any "source" in a while due to poster losing his credibility a while ago.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

you skipped over (conveniently) the part about it was only the picture that was not about south africa
the article was about the congo and south africa
also skipped over the fact that trump was paging through a bunch of different articles about south africa
amazing how you are just like the fake news...

Not about the video but about the photo he held up (regarding credibility)
https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/trumps-image-dead-white-farmers-came-reuters-footage-congo-not-south-africa-2025-05-22/

you skipped over (conveniently) the part about it was only the picture that was not about south africa
the article was about the congo and south africa
also skipped over the fact that trump was paging through a bunch of different articles about south africa
amazing how you are just like the fake news...

I'm glad that you clicked on the link to show that EEF didn't post a credible like like how I assumed.  And even though "assumptions are the mother of all f-ups", I was correct in this situtation.

InB4 EEF states that he never specified if his link was to show or reduce credibility since he just wrote "(regarding credibility)" and left out good or bad.

Enter goalpost moving.

you skipped over (conveniently) the part about it was only the picture that was not about south africa
the article was about the congo and south africa
also skipped over the fact that trump was paging through a bunch of different articles about south africa
amazing how you are just like the fake news...

Wrong. I specifically said it was about the photo and not the video.

Didnt click as poster has no "credibility". Havent clicked on any "source" in a while due to poster losing his credibility a while ago.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Keep your head burring in the sand, doesn't hurt me. 

so, because of one photo that was in an article about south africa, he has zero credibility?

Wrong. I specifically said it was about the photo and not the video.

so, because of one photo that was in an article about south africa, he has zero credibility?

Show me where I said "zero credibility"

ok, you never said "zero"
but you were calling into doubt his credibility
"Not about the video but about the photo he held up (regarding credibility)"
the photo was incorrect, but the article was not...

Show me where I said "zero credibility"

ok, you never said "zero"
but you were calling into doubt his credibility
"Not about the video but about the photo he held up (regarding credibility)"
the photo was incorrect, but the article was not...

If I am making the argument that there is a genocide in South Africa then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt. I think this hurts credibility. To give Trump the benefit of the doubt I think some air probably gave him that and he believed it was an accurate photo but it still doesn't help inspire confidence that he knows what he is talking about. The existence of a genocide against white farmers in south africa is already highly debatable so holding up fake evidence doesn't bode well for the argument that there is.

If I am making the argument that there is a genocide in South Africa then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt. I think this hurts credibility. To give Trump the benefit of the doubt I think some air probably gave him that and he believed it was an accurate photo but it still doesn't help inspire confidence that he knows what he is talking about. The existence of a genocide against white farmers in south africa is already highly debatable so holding up fake evidence doesn't bode well for the argument that there is.

Did you even read Mac's reply to your link?

Geez, here we go again. But luckily, this thread is already multiple pages.

Just a few news feeds today stated that Elon is leaving because he's hitting on both the POTUS and VP's wives and they (trump/Vance) both want him gone.

The fake news used the ole "a source tells us"...

What would have been more interesting if they made up a headline like "Trump doesn't know how to deal with a person with Asperger's". 

Dealing with someone on the spectrum has it's challenges.  But being on the spectrum doesn't give them the right to be an a-hole or giving into what ever they say  like it's word of god. 

They may not advertise that they're on the spectrum or even be aware of it.  But it's easy to see the signs if you know what to look for.

https://youtu.be/cFHqJhkGcF8?si=hZbL7yWtRi7ao-_8&t=132
listen to what he says
FOCUS
"these are articles"...

If I am making the argument that there is a genocide in South Africa then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt. I think this hurts credibility. To give Trump the benefit of the doubt I think some air probably gave him that and he believed it was an accurate photo but it still doesn't help inspire confidence that he knows what he is talking about. The existence of a genocide against white farmers in south africa is already highly debatable so holding up fake evidence doesn't bode well for the argument that there is.

https://youtu.be/cFHqJhkGcF8?si=hZbL7yWtRi7ao-_8&t=132
listen to what he says
FOCUS
"these are articles"...

Do you not think it reasonable to expect that the president have accurate information when presenting something to the public? I am not saying the president has no credibility, I am only saying this hurt his credibility. If you disagree thats fine.

Do you not think it reasonable to expect that the president have accurate information when presenting something to the public? I am not saying the president has no credibility, I am only saying this hurt his credibility. If you disagree thats fine.

Annnddd here it is as predicted.

"then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt"
focus
first you say photo, and when that is disproven, you then move goalposts to "accurate information"

Do you not think it reasonable to expect that the president have accurate information when presenting something to the public? I am not saying the president has no credibility, I am only saying this hurt his credibility. If you disagree thats fine.

no answer to avoid having to say, "i was wrong"...

"then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt"
focus
first you say photo, and when that is disproven, you then move goalposts to "accurate information"

"then hold up a photo as evidence but it is later found out the photo isn't from South Africa then my credibility is hurt"
focus
first you say photo, and when that is disproven, you then move goalposts to "accurate information"

What I said wasn't disproven, he held up an article which contained a photo.

If you don't think this hurt his credibility that's fine, we don't have to agree on matters of opinion.

you said "photo"
focus...

What I said wasn't disproven, he held up an article which contained a photo.

If you don't think this hurt his credibility that's fine, we don't have to agree on matters of opinion.