Trump campaign chief: it's not lying if he didn't know whether it was true or not when he said it

A friend and I used joke about the broadcast-standard delivery of these lines:
"You’re gonna look pretty funny tryin’ to eat corn on the cob with noTEEEEETH!“
"Well then… I guess you’re really up [pause] TheCreek.”

No one else knew what the hell we were talking about…


There’s a glaring hole in boingboing’s presidential coverage, where’s the Clinton posts? It’s all hate for Trump, put no hate or love for Clinton?

So I guess it’s better to just be completely ignorant, so you never have to worry about telling a lie.

“Hey, I thought it was true!”


I don’t know, I’m equally fascinated, impressed, and utterly repulsed by Katrina Pierson. How someone can spew bullshit of such quality and in such quantity, without any detectable regard for what other people think – wow. Like a bulldozer that someone set to full throttle, jumped out, and let it keep going, because fuck it.


Which is more newsworthy and interesting?

Adult human being asks voters for support based on her policy proposals and years of experience


Bigoted orangutan takes stage at political rally, throws feces amid incoherent shrieks, wins support of nearly half of American voters


Trump’s campaign strategy is to say outrageous, extreme, ludicrous, attention-grabbing things as much as possible to get press coverage. He’s using the “there’s no such thing as bad publicity” approach. Horrifyingly, it works. The media’s saturated with coverage.

Clinton’s running a more normal campaign that focuses on ads and in her speeches she says things that are typical for a Democratic politician, so the press largely ignores her other than to address the things Trump says about her, or to obsess with hyper-focus on the mail server and other scandals.

Trump’s media saturation by outrage approach bleeds over here, so we get more stories about Trump’s attention-grabbing, outrageous, ludicrousness.

There are Clinton-related posts, though:


yes!!! That pause for “up…the creek” is forever burned in my memory. My brother and I would know exactly what you were talking about.

1 Like

The campaign of the GOP nominee has now gone full meta by lying about lying.

It absolutely IS lying to falsely represent that you know a matter to be true, even if you don’t know whether or not the matter is actually true. This is referred to in legal authority as “reckless disregard for the truth.”

For example, California Penal Code section 125, which has been in effect since 1872, states that “An unqualified statement of that which one does not know to be true is equivalent to a statement of that which one knows to be false.” Thus under California law such statements can be prosecuted as perjury. I am sure most or all other jurisdictions have similar laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that statements made with reckless disregard for their truth, as with knowingly false statements, are not entitled to constitutional protection under the First Amendment. For example, see Garrison v. Louisiana or N.Y. Times v. Sullivan.

The BBS software is not allowing me to include more links, but the Supreme Court cases are readily available on the Google for the truly avid readers and/or insomniacs in search of a cure.


Exactly. It takes real courage and self-confidence to admit a mistake. I’ve seen little evidence of either in Trump, or in recent republican politicians in general. Bluster, arrogance, and ignorance aren’t the same.


So, are they moving goalposts, or are they fine with Trump being referred to as an ignoramus instead of a liar?

1 Like

I thought it was chimpanzees that indicated their displeasure at being kept in cages by human speciesists by hurling the only material to hand.

I know this is a tired old joke, but please don’t insult orangutans. They’re an endangered species that deserve a better press.

Bigoted human being pretends to be orangutan…I can get alongside that.


Trump’s lies are all about making Trump look good. He’ll say two completely contradictory things, yes, and both might be equally stupid and divorced from reality, but they’re always intended to bolster his own image (or at least his own ego) at the moment he says them. That, more than anything else, is the real through line.


I think we should just stick to calling Trump a liar when he lies. There is no need to dumb it down to “bullshit”. The appropriate term for Trump is Pathological Liar, IMO, not the more benign sounding “bullshitter”, the latter being the term we give to Cliff at the Cheers bar, not the the term appropriate for GOP candidate running for what is likely the most powerful elected position on earth.


Thing is, Trump is running one of those cons where he doesn’t hide the fact that he’s a con artist. The key is just to convince the mark that they are not the mark, but a co-conspirator.


There is a great BBC version of Alex Cox’s “Repoman” that has been redubbed throughout with, “Melonfarmer”.


I am waiting for when Google’s AI red flags any links which appear to contain falsehoods. Soon after this its army of killer robots will go after serial internet liars, and shortly after that there’s going to be an awful lot of elections.


But nobody left to vote in them.


This is hardly the first time this particular relationship between Trump’s statements and reality has been commented on. Trump clearly does not actually care if what he says is true or not. Hell, he doesn’t even care if it’s a comprehensible English sentence. But to have the campaign manager say, as an excuse, it’s not a lie, because he spoke without knowing the facts, so it’s okay! That’s kinda out there.


I think this is called “a distinction without a difference”. Libel laws include both deliberate misrepresentation or “reckless disregard for the truth”,