Timothy Egan

Ms. Collins is off today.  Mr. Egan, while not a regular op-ed writer is a contributor from time to time.  What he has to say today is worthy of serious consideration.  In “Lord of the Lies” he suggests that given the scale of Trump’s mendacity, we should go into the fall debates with a new rule: an instant fact-check on statements made by the candidates.  Here he is:

Earlier this month, the world’s most battle-scarred cable news network did something extraordinary in this year of vaporous political contrails. While Donald Trump was delivering one of his easily debunked lies, CNN fact-checked him — in near real time at the bottom of the screen.

“Trump: I never said Japan should have nukes (he did).” Thus read the chyron that shook the television world — maybe.

I no more expect CNN to set Wolf Blitzer’s beard on fire than to instantly call out the Mount Everest of liars. Trump lies about big things (there is no drought in California) and small things (his hair spray could not affect the ozone layer because it’s sealed within Trump Tower). He lies about himself, and the fake self he invented to talk about himself. He’s been shown to lie more than 70 times in a single event.

Given the scale of Trump’s mendacity and the stakes for the free world, it’s time that we go into the fall debates with a new rule — an instant fact-check on statements made by the candidates onstage. The Presidential Debate Commission should do what any first-grader with Google access can do, and call out lies before the words hit the floor.

Setting up a truth referee is not difficult. And while doing such a thing is unlikely to ensure that the debates would be substantive, it could at least guarantee a reality foundation at a time when fact-free speech is the language of the political class.

How can we discuss the economy when Trump suggests that the unemployment rate, just under 5 percent, is actually 42 percent? Or debate the Paris climate accord, when Trump falsely claims it “gives foreign bureaucrats control over how much energy we use on our land”? Or deal with terrorism, after Trump said he knows “more about ISIS than the generals.” The debates are meaningless without a neutral party screening the garbage.

Professional truth-seekers have never seen anything like Trump, surely the most compulsive liar to seek high office. To date, the nonpartisan PolitiFact has rated 76 percent of his statements lies — 57 percent false or mostly false, and another 19 percent “Pants on Fire” fabrications. Only 2 percent — 2 percent! — of his assertions were rated true, and another 6 percent mostly true. Hillary Clinton, who is not exactly known for fealty to the facts, had a 28 percent total lie score, including a mere 1 percent Pants on Fire.

The Washington Post’s Fact Checker has dinged Trump with 30 of its Four Pinocchio ratings — lying 70 percent of the time. Trump cares so little about the truth that when the Fact Checker reaches out to him for an explanation, he never responds, the paper noted.

Trump got his start on the national political stage as a liar, playing to the birther fantasies of Barack Obama’s worst haters. One of the questions he might be asked in the three fall debates is what, exactly, he discovered when he claimed his investigators “cannot believe what they’re finding” in Hawaii five years ago.

With Trump University, he created a business model built on a house of lies. An executive called it “a total lie,” and a sales manager said it was a “fraudulent scheme” designed to bilk vulnerable clients, according to court testimony. It was that class-action lawsuit that got Trump into his present caldron of lies — calling the Indiana-born judge in the case a “Mexican.” By that standard, Trump is a German, with a grandfather from Kallstadt.

Some of Trump’s lies are the everyday speech of a charlatan — trade talk. At a bizarre news conference in March, he called Trump Winery “the largest winery on the East Coast.” Not even close, according to PolitiFact. Last month he said he had more employees in New Jersey “than almost anybody.” Not a chance. There’s a word for this kind of person, the guy who spits on your tie and then tells you he likes your sheen, but The New York Times does not allow me to print it.

For a while, I tried to chart the days of his lies, and just got overwhelmed. He said the suicide of the former Clinton aide Vince Foster was “very fishy,” when five separate investigations found it to be a sad self-killing and nothing more. He could have looked at the United States Drought Monitor before saying “there is no drought” at the very California site that is now in its fifth year of an epic arid spell.

He even lies about his lies. He claimed he wanted to keep a personal donation to veterans private, when in fact he’d boasted in January of a $1 million gift, which wasn’t sent out until the press began questioning him on it months later.

Sadly, a lot of voters don’t care if a candidate is a pathological liar. But most of us should. It’s up to the debate commission, as they set the rules for the fall, to ensure that truth has a place on the stage.

In the comments “Jim S.” from Cleveland had another suggestion:  “Rather than just putting a crawl at the bottom of the screen, which given production delays would likely no longer be about the topic being discussed, provide feedback to the moderators via laptop or similar. Then allow the moderator to come back with “A few minutes ago, Mr. Trump, you claimed X, when in fact it is Y. How do you respond?”  Force the candidates to face up to their claims, on camera.”  The problem with that, Jim, is that no member of the broadcast media seems to be willing to call Trump out on his lies.  And his supporters don’t give a rat’s ass.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Timothy Egan”

  1. Russian Sage Says:

    What does this election come down to if not the truth? The baser ideas like should a woman run the country? If u saw the BW’s interview with Trump and u didn’t want to destroy him than perhaps there’s no use wasting time with erudite lesson on Chapter 11 and what it would mean for his negotiating the value out of the dollar to offset the debt in the Fed’s balance sheet. He doesn’t rally people to his support. He relies on their animosity. They’re voting for hate. He engages their own delusions and manifestations of failure and he doesn’t have to own up because his followers don’t care. I’m not saying the Times is wasting its money but they’re could do better. U have to come up with something better than addressing an already left leaning readership.

  2. edtracey Says:

    “I no more expect CNN to set Wolf Blitzer’s beard on fire than to instantly call out the Mount Everest of liars”.

    *** That would be a ratings-grabber, huh?

    – Ed

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: