CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies | Daniel Dale broke down why Trump's latest untruths are unprecedented to "CNN Tonight" host Don Lemon.

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies

CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies
CNN Fact-Checker Nails ‘Unique’ Aspect Of Donald Trump’s Latest Lies
  • By: huffingtonpost.com.au
  • Views 1
0
Shared

CNN’s fact-checking reporter Daniel Dale on Monday noted the “unique” aspect of Donald Trump’s dishonest claims about the Ukraine scandal and the impeachment inquiry into the president.

Dale told “CNN Tonight” host Don Lemon ― as a list of 45 untruths that Trump has told about the scandal and the inquiry scrolled down the screen ― they were unprecedented “because of how comprehensively Trump is lying here.”

“If you fact-check Trump, or just watch Trump, you know that he lies about basically every subject,” said Dale.

“What’s unique about the Ukraine story is that he’s lying about basically every individual component of the story,” he continued. “So he’s not sprinkling in lies here and there, and mixing them up with platitudes and the stuff that’s true.”

“Everything he’s saying about his dealings with Ukraine, about the Bidens’ dealings with Ukraine,  about the whistleblower, about Schiff, about the impeachment process. It’s all wrong, all the time,” Dale concluded. 

Check out the clip here:

Donald Trump's Mysterious Hospital Visit Is Raising A Few Questions

Donald Trump's Mysterious Hospital Visit Is Raising A Few Questions

An unscheduled weekend visit to hospital has raised suspicions about the health of President Donald Trump.

White House officials have insisted the president was merely getting a head start on his annual medical when he visited the Walter Reed National Military Medical Centre on Saturday.

For any president, a sudden trip to the hospital would raise questions, but such scrutiny was magnified with a president who has a history of exaggeration and playing loose with the facts, giving sceptics room to run with their own theories.

“The one thing you can be absolutely sure of is this was not routine and he didn’t go up there for half his physical,” tweeted Joe Lockhart, a press secretary under then president Bill Clinton, who was himself impeached for perjury and obstruction.

“What does it mean? It means that we just won’t know what the medical issue was.”

The president’s medical appointment was not listed on his Saturday public schedule, and his last medical was just nine months ago.

Press secretary Stephanie Grisham said the 73-year-old president was “anticipating a very busy 2020” and wanted to take advantage of “a free weekend” in Washington to begin portions of his routine check-up.

Grisham followed up on Monday night tweeting a memorandum from the president’s physician, US Navy Commander Sean Conley, who described Saturday’s visit as a “routine, planned interim checkup as part of the regular, primary preventative care he received throughout the year”.

Dr Conley said that, due to scheduling uncertainties, the trip was kept off the record.

He said after a little more than an hour of examination, tests and discussion, the president visited with medical staff and the family of a soldier undergoing surgery.

“Despite some of the speculation, the president has not had any chest pain, nor was he evaluated or treated for any urgent or acute issues,” Conley wrote.

Conley added that Trump consented to sharing his cholesterol level, now at 165, down from 196. A total below 170 is considered good.

Trump’s 2018 and 2019 physicals were both announced ahead of time.

Grisham said after the visit that the president had got “a quick exam and labs”.

“The president remains healthy and energetic without complaints, as demonstrated by his repeated vigorous rally performances in front of thousands of Americans several times a week,” she said.

But some did not believe Grisham’s explanation.

“The real Donald Trump is getting exposed for what he’s done, and that’s what’s driving him to the doctor,” Rahm Emanuel, a former Clinton aide and Chicago mayor, said on Sunday on ABC’s This Week.

Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Centre at the University of Pennsylvania, said it was reasonable for the press to be asking questions about the president’s health.

She said the country has a long history of presidents hiding physical ailments from the public.

Woodrow Wilson suffered a paralytic stroke in 1919 and the full details of his disability were kept from the public.

Franklin D. Roosevelt won a fourth term despite severe hypertension that would contribute to his death 11 weeks into his term.

Dwight D. Eisenhower suffered a heart attack in his first term, in 1955, and a reassessment of his medical records and public information four decades later found that the information released to the public was recast to serve the president’s political interests ahead of his 1956 re-election campaign.

Jamieson noted that Trump was criticised for releasing only cursory details on his health prior to the election.

The president’s doctor, Harold N. Bornstein, wrote in December 2015 that Trump would “unequivocally” be the healthiest president in history and deemed the celebrity businessman’s condition “astonishingly excellent.”

Dr Bornstein later said he wrote the note in five minutes while a limo sent by the candidate waited outside his office.

Jamieson said there is a set of expectations about how a president’s annual exam is handled, which includes the advance public notice that the Trump White House provided for his first two exams.

She said the reasonable question is: “If this is routine, why was it not handled in a routine manner?”

Grisham said everything the White House has said about the Walter Reed visit is “true and accurate”.

“Just because it was done a little differently doesn’t mean anything is wrong,” she said.

Trump and the White House have characterised the visit as “phase one” of his annual physical.

But the explanation raised questions simply because its handling was unusual.

First, annual physicals typically are not performed in instalments unless someone needs a special test not available at their doctor’s office — something that shouldn’t be an issue at a military hospital.

Nor are they usually performed three months early.

Trump’s last medical was last February.

Dr Conley said that primary preventative medical care is something that occurs continuously during the year and is not just a single annual event.

“As such, I will continue to monitor the president’s health, planning on a more comprehensive examination after the New Year.”

Some lab tests might be performed every few months if a doctor suspects a problem, but otherwise blood tests such as a check of whether Trump’s medication is keeping his high cholesterol in check normally would be performed at the one-year mark.

His prior physicals were scheduled in advance not only because that’s how doctors schedule everyone’s “wellness” check-ups, even VIPs, but because a presidential visit to a hospital prompts extra security concerns.

We're Trying To Raise Our Child Gender-Fluid. Here's What We've Learned In The Process.

We're Trying To Raise Our Child Gender-Fluid. Here's What We've Learned In The Process.

As a woman who was raised decidedly in the “pink” side of the gender binary, with bows, ruffled socks, dresses, ballet classes and gymnastics, I know what I’m trying to do now as a mother is different than what my own parents did and what many others are still doing. Every parent’s journey in deciding how they want to raise their kids will be different and should be respected.

My parenting choice to attempt to raise my toddler free from the pink and blue gender binary wasn’t necessarily a result of one thing, but rather a conscious choice I’ve been trying to figure out over time. What I know today is that my husband and I want my child to have as many options in life as possible. 

The first conscious decision I made, along with my husband, was to wait to find out the biological sex, not gender—as one of my doctors reminded me, gender is an identity one adopts over time—until I gave birth. During my pregnancy this involved reminding several healthcare providers not to inform me. As a result, baby’s first nine months of existence inside my womb were full of those possibilities, and, as it was, after my 40+ hours of labor, my husband and I were in so much shock when our 8-pound newborn finally made an appearance that it took a few minutes to ask the midwife what the biological sex was when we realized that the umbilical cord was blocking the genital area.

My parenting choice to attempt to raise my toddler free from the pink and blue gender binary wasn’t necessarily a result of one thing, but rather a conscious choice I’ve been trying to figure out over time.

Those first few minutes are probably the only my child will have free from any expectations of how to look, behave and feel. Because once the nurses found out the biological sex, they began saying things that reflect how our society treats biological females and males differently, even from day one. They’re the kind of things I have probably said in the past, without thinking. That’s how common it all is. “Oh, your girl is so beautiful.” “What a big, strong boy you have.” But now that it was my child, I wanted to start thinking about the words I (and others around me) use and all the other ways we create (or reinforce) gender norms without realizing it. 

The very first time I actively had a conversation about this newfound thinking was while I was still in the hospital. A nurse was assisting me with my catheter in the bathroom, while my husband and parents were in the delivery room, and I overheard my husband using gendered language to refer to our newborn. While still on pain meds and bleeding heavily enough that I was being monitored, I was experiencing a moment of clarity.

When I stepped out into the room, I asked him to examine the words he’d said, what feeling or emotion was he trying to communicate? After all, aren’t phrases like “my beautiful princess” or “my handsome little man” placeholders for expressing love and pride? From that moment on, he’s used “mi vida” (“my life”) to convey that same feeling of pure joy and unconditional love that he felt in those first moments of holding our baby. Once we had that conversation, it opened up many more honest ones since, where we’ve discussed how to handle everything from the words others use to the (sometimes gendered) gifts they offer our baby.

I wanted to start thinking about the words I (and others around me) use and all the other ways we create (or reinforce) gender norms without realizing it.

For the first year and a half, setting out to raise a child free from gender stereotypes was mostly focused on looks. I spent hours agonizing over not-so-great clothing options available online and in person, ultimately opting for a mix from both the “girls” and “boys” sections. On one trip to the now shuttered Toys ’R Us to use up a gift card, I circled the same handful of infant clothing racks over and over hoping to find something, anything, that was not pink, not blue, and not white or grey — colors that are not really neutral so much as really hard to clean. 

When it comes to looks, time and again, I’ve learned that the default gender is male until proven otherwise. When we went to get baby’s first passport photo at just a few weeks old, the photographer told us how “handsome” our “son” was, dressed in a white onesie. In anything bright and colorful, our baby is usually described as a “beautiful girl” or “princess.” It raises the question, which came first: Putting bows on babies to identify them as girls or the assumption that individuals have to be “dressed up” to be perceived as female? When our baby turned 1, we traveled together as a family of three in South America for half a year. After that experience, I’ve learned the specifics of being identified by others as a gender other than male can be even more exacting: In certain countries we visited, I observed that babies are only identified as non-male if they have long hair, wear bright “pretty” clothing along with bows or other accessories, and — a big must, they have to have pierced ears.

Which came first: Putting bows on babies to identify them as girls or the assumption that individuals have to be 'dressed up' to be perceived as female?

Figuring out how to break free from the binary of dressing our child as solely one gender or another was all a warmup. It was all about getting into good habits, checking our biases, removing gendered words like “pretty” or “handsome” from our vocabulary. We also did some evolving of our own. I chopped my long hair off for the first time to see how I like it. My husband started growing his out for the same reason. And as the older generation in our family got on board with what we were doing, my mom surprised my dad with a Scottish kilt for Christmas in her family tartan. A friend told my parents, “Why bother? Your grandchild won’t remember this.” My parents said, “Our grandbaby will never know any different. This will be our reality.”

Now that my toddler is mobile, more visible in the world, and soaking up everything people are saying like a sponge, the marathon of navigating gendered perceptions of behavior and feelings has begun. And it’s all uncharted territory. I haven’t yet figured out how to react, for instance, when people say things like, “Look at how well-behaved she is” when our 20-month-old acts respectfully to others — something I’d encourage my child to do regardless of gender identity. When a baby is dressed in clothing perceived to be female and cries in public, people are more likely to pass judgement and shush our little one. And those default male clothes? They’re good for something. With those on, I know I don’t have to worry about how loud the cries get. 

For our family, there’s some added complexity. We’re an English/Spanish bilingual household and other than the recent popularization of the gender-neutral term Latinx, used to refer to people who identify as Latin American, the rest of the Spanish language as it is spoken and written today assumes a binary, so we are using gendered pronouns in both languages ― which one is irrelevant here. I admire families raising “Theybies”— those who use they, instead of she or he — and maybe if I’d thought of the concept before ours was born we might have found a way to make it work. 

For now, I am trying not to let the words myself and others use define my child’s future. 

I want my little one to know that all people deserve to be loved — to be whoever they are — no matter what colors they like, outfits they wear or hobbies they enjoy.

My own words may be imperfect. And how I put my beliefs into practice may be inconsistent — especially when I don’t feel prepared or comfortable correcting the things people say. But my intentions come from the heart: I want my little one to know that all people deserve to be loved — to be whoever they are — no matter what colors they like, outfits they wear or hobbies they enjoy. That looks, attitudes, interests, feelings and identities can be fluid and evolve over time, regardless of one’s biological sex. That no one should ever experience limitations on their ambitions, discrimination, bullying or violence because of their gender. 

Gender creative parenting— the idea that baby has the freedom to choose whatever gender expression (whether that’s female, male, neither or both) feels comfortable—is important to me because I know for many the pink and blue binary is harmful and stifles individuals from realizing and feeling safe expressing their identities. I identify as female, but my concept of “being female” has evolved over time, and I don’t subscribe to most of the ways gender is defined by society—of having to look, act or feel a certain way. One of the unspoken beliefs of the religion I was born into, Mormonism, is that women are second to men in all ways. Unlearning that, and other damaging gender constructs, has taken years. Instead of having to learn how to break free from society’s confines, I want my little one to be able to simply be ― whatever that means. 

For the first year and a half of my child’s life, we’ve been lucky to manage caring for our child between myself, my husband, my parents and my sister-in-law — all of whom have been on board with our approach to avoiding gender norms. As baby’s second birthday is approaching, the reality of work demands may change. We’re considering daycare, and, beyond that, bilingual public schools. Given how hard I — all of us — have worked to create a safe space for our little one to grow into the unique person baby will become, I am afraid of what messages potential caregivers and teachers might send to my child.

Even seemingly simple things like going to the bathroom or joining sports teams at school will be topics for us to consider — reminders of how gendered our society still is. At times, it all feels too much. I asked a co-worker I admire how he sends his child off to elementary school every day without worrying that others will counteract the nurturing environment he’s created at home. I think about his words whenever things feel hard: This positivity, love and freedom we have provided isn’t going anywhere, we will continue to provide it and it will be with my little one on every step of the way out into the larger world. 

When I see my child dart off ahead of me, stepping with purpose down the dirt road outside the home where we’re staying, I don’t see a girl or boy running, I see a small person so full of life — possibility. And I hope that always stays the same.

Disney+: Bizarre 'Frozen' Theory Is Nearly 50 Years In The Making

Disney+: Bizarre 'Frozen' Theory Is Nearly 50 Years In The Making

A bizarre Disney theory has been floating around since the release of “Frozen” in 2013, and people just can’t ... let it go.

The theory shows up on Reddit, on Twitter, and it’s regularly perpetuated in articles about “Frozen.”

The people demand to know: Did Disney name the movie “Frozen” so stories about Walt Disney’s frozen head would stop showing up on a Google search?

The legend of Walt Disney being cryogenically frozen is easily one of the most enduring pop culture conspiracy theories. It’s impressive considering all indications are that he was cremated. But no matter how many times the notion has been put on ice in the last 50 years, it keeps being revived, popping up again and again, serving as the butt of jokes in TV shows such as “30 Rock” and “Family Guy.”

With “Frozen 2” coming to theaters on Nov. 22, now seems as good a time as any to find out if the franchise had anything to do with the theory.

The answer, according to writer/director Jennifer Lee? Hell snow.

In a 2018 interview about another one of her movies, “A Wrinkle in Time,” HuffPost asked if she’d heard about the theory.

“I have heard that one,” Lee said. “These are things where I’m like, we called it ‘Frozen’ for thematic reasons, and we called it Disney’s ‘Frozen’ because Disney made the film. Disney paid for the film and distributed it.”

Lee, who heads Disney Animation Studios, said all her creative energy went into the movie itself. She added with a laugh, “I wish I were that clever.”

The rumor that Walt Disney was frozen after his death has a few possible origins. But the theory seems to have been traced back to a 1972 interview between The Los Angeles Times and Robert Nelson, a former TV repairman who was enamored with cryonics and became the president of the Cryonics Society of California.

In comments from the interview surfaced by Los Angeles Magazine, Nelson mentions that Disney wanted to be frozen but claims he missed out. Weeks after his death in December 1966, a man named James Bedford became the first to freeze. (He’s still chilling today.)

In Nelson’s 2014 memoir, “Freezing People Is (Not) Easy,” he recalled his rise and fall in the field of cryonics — including a scandal in which nine bodies Nelson was preserving in a cemetery vault in Chatsworth, a Los Angeles suburb, had thawed out. He also describes how he believes the Disney legend started.

According to the book, shortly before Disney’s death, Nelson received a call from a woman who described herself as “an associate of the Walt Disney Studio.” The Disney rep had called to get information on cryopreservation, including what facilities there were, what doctors were involved and how many people had been frozen.

Nelson wrote that his “heart sank.” No one had been frozen yet, and no cryogenic facility existed. He gave the rep the names of two doctors, Dr. Dante Brunol and Dr. Renault Able, who were scientific collaborators. She thanked him and the call ended.

Nelson died in 2018 and is currently frozen at the Cryonics Institute. But in researching the origins of the Disney story, we were led to Dr. Michael Perry, a historian of cryonics, who’s been interested in the field since the 1960s and is a member of the Alcor Life Extension Foundation. Perry, who’d known Nelson since 1990, had helped him with his memoir, performing such tasks as fact-checking. 

Perry confirmed Disney wasn’t frozen.

“As far as any of us knows, and according to all the claims I have ever seen, he was cremated, not frozen,” he told HuffPost.

He also said Nelson’s description of the Disney call is accurate.

“Disney studios did briefly contact him,” Perry said. “It was before his organization, Cryonics Society of California, had frozen anybody. They didn’t have any real facilities. They had a couple of doctors they worked with, but they’re not really doing it yet. And that’s pretty much it. Apparently, that was the only contact (Nelson) had, just that one phone call.”

One call was enough, it seems, to perpetuate the rumor.

“Some rumors just won’t die down, and I think it just captures people’s attention, and they keep it going,” Perry said. “Maybe people find it intriguing that Disney might be frozen.”

ADVERTISING
ADVERTISING

Easy Branches Global Network allows You to share Your post within our Network in any Continent or Country on the Global

Your Post
boatshowchina expolifestyle.com