Fake News

 

Remarkable, isn’t it, that Donald Trump has made decrying “fake news” his calling card? Is the press hostile to him? Sure. Do they lie about him? For the most part, no. Then again, the truth is not everyone’s friend. As William Randolph Hearst once quipped: “If Mr. Hughes will stop telling lies about me, I’ll stop telling the truth about him.” Or, even better, William F. Buckley said of Gore Vidal: “Anyone who lies about him is doing him a favor.”

On his visit to Iraq, the president lied to the troops. How can you claim to honor people you are lying to? Lying signals contempt. “We are always going to protect you. And you just saw that, ’cause you just got one of the biggest pay raises you’ve ever received. … You haven’t gotten one in more than 10 years. More than 10 years. And we got you a big one. I got you a big one.”

Sure. Here’s the Pentagon’s online account of pay raises over the past 10 years. The military received raises each year for the past 10 years.

Mr. Trump wasn’t finished. “They had plenty of people that came up, they said, ‘You know, we could make it smaller. We could make it 3 percent, we could make it 2 percent, we could make it 4 percent,'” Trump told the troops about the latest pay raise. “I said, ‘No. Make it 10 percent. Make it more than 10 percent.'”

The late William Safire once wrote a column about his old boss, Richard Nixon, who had a weakness for claiming that aides had counseled him to “take the easy way out.” Safire joked (I’m paraphrasing) “Yes, I’m the one. I always proposed that he do the expedient thing, not the right thing.”

Trump takes the Nixon tick to new levels. The Boy Scouts claimed his speech to the jamboree was the greatest ever. The NFL called to agree that the timing of a presidential debate was terrible. Federal workers have been ringing him up to say “Keep the government closed,” though they are working without pay. What a lively phone life he has.

Anyway, did Trump request a 10 percent pay increase for the troops? No. Trump’s administration requested an increase of 2.1 percent for 2018. Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act which included a 2.4 percent raise. In 2019, the troops will receive a 2.6 percent increase, which is the largest in nine years. But, even in the Trump era, 2.6 is not 10.

Speaking of previous efforts to visit Iraq that had been thwarted by security concerns, the president complained: “Pretty sad when you spend $7 trillion in the Middle East and going in has to be under this massive cover . . .”

It’s not the first time Mr. Trump has used this figure. On the campaign trail, he used to say that we had spent $6 trillion in the Middle East (“that’s trillion with a t”). And then, one day, he just began to say $7 trillion. And there it has remained. Don’t be surprised if it goes to $8 trillion when the mood suits him. Who says the inflation rate is low?

In 2014, the Congressional Research Service put the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts at $1.6 trillion. When questioned about the $7 trillion figure, the White House pointed to a paper by Boston University political scientist Neta Crawford. Her work factored together a great deal more than spending on Iraq and Afghanistan. She focused on all of our post-9/11 spending including not just the wars in those two countries, but also State Department and Agency for International Development spending, homeland security expenditures, and war-related veterans care and disability expenses. Still, even adding all of those extras into her calculations, she arrived at a figure of $3.6 trillion by 2016. She then also added something more – the cost of caring for veterans stretching into 2053, and “additional cumulative interest on past appropriations” to reach the number $8 trillion over 35 years.

Those are some loosey goosey numbers. But even assuming total good faith on Crawford’s part, and assuming Mr. Trump is even aware of her, he is grossly distorting her work. He constantly asserts that we’ve already spent $7 trillion on wars in the “Middle East,” not that our total post-9/11 expenditures on defense, diplomacy, homeland security, and veterans care until 2053 may add up to that.

So even while visiting the troops — a good deed — he managed to soil it by flinging lies in all directions.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 95 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    use it to mean stories in which he is criticized.

    Why would this be getting out of control?

    —-

    All I was doing was indicating where you can see Peter Schiff talk about the real economic dynamics that affect the GOP and Trump. The fact is, when Jones has a good guest on, he can let them go on and on just like a podcast. It isn’t typical commercial radio in that sense.

    I have a hard time taking seriously anyone who would appear on Alex Jones’ Infowars. (That includes “you know who.”)

    It’s understandable. There was a ton of “normals” on it, say like five years ago. Not now.

    For me it’s entertainment, but there are hundreds of thousands that take it all seriously.

    And tens of millions who find it disqualifying. Me included. We cannot win the Presidency, or hold the Senate with the support of only 38% of the voting public.

    What do you recommend?

    Any Republican with a pulse over Trump. ABT: Anybody but Trump.

    You can complain about Trump being a populist but no one in the GOP gets reelected talking like Rep. Tom Massey.

    It is not possible to be re-elected with only 38% support. And we will lose another dozen Representatives, a half dozen Senators, a half dozen Governors, and hundreds more legislators.

    They have no coordinated plan to slow down socialism and hold political power at the same time. No one is going to do anything. 

     

    • #91
  2. ctlaw Coolidge
    ctlaw
    @ctlaw

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    It is not possible to be re-elected with only 38% support. And we will lose another dozen Representatives, a half dozen Senators, a half dozen Governors, and hundreds more legislators.

    Define that 38% support. It’s easy to win if 38% support you and 35% support your specific opponent. And that’s before addressing geographic/electoral issues.

    • #92
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    This is the Peter Schiff interview for those interested. 

    • #93
  4. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    I appreciate anyone that goes on the Alex Jones program.  What should we do with his large listening audience? Ignore them and leave them to ever extreme beliefs? 

    I will check out the Schiff interview. He’s someone I always find interesting. Thanks for the link RRJ. 

    • #94
  5. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Annefy (View Comment):
    I appreciate anyone that goes on the Alex Jones program. What should we do with his large listening audience? Ignore them and leave them to ever extreme beliefs? 

    There is something to that. Also, Paul Joseph Watson is pretty talented and sensible. 

    Roger Stone was pretty smart to coopt it. 

    In the old days, 20% of the guests were pretty reasonable and they could talk for a long time. 

    He gets some good guest hosts for the ending segments. 

    • #95
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.