At what point do we become responsible for talking against leaders like Trump?

[sanderabeer]

1. When does it become our responsibility to discern truth for ourselves and stop blindly trusting what we’re told,- whether that message is for or against a leader?

Every moment of every day.

2. And if the media we're listening to is constantly negative about a leader, at what point do we become responsible for spreading lies, slander or gossip?

I am always responsible everything that I say.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

CNN and MSNBC contain numerous videos of the president-- both full length speeches, press conferences, clips, and meetings.
I could wear noise canceling headphones for all the commentary and arrive at the same conclusion. He practices extortion and threats to get his way. He is verbally and psychologically abusive. He is ignorant of the law and the Constitution. He lies as frequently as other people blink.
His own words, gestures, and behavior show us what kind of human being he is.

All that could easily apply to you Fervent.

 

[1Tonne]

So, based on some of the comments here, it’s clear that people hold strong views—especially when it comes to Trump. While some criticisms have merit (like the fact that he can be a bully—though in certain leadership roles, that assertiveness can actually be useful), much of what’s said tends to be personal opinion or speculation rather than fact.

When it comes to media, it’s also obvious that many outlets have chosen a side—most leaning against Trump, with only a few offering more favorable coverage. It raises the question: are there any truly neutral news sources left?


One thing I’ve been wondering about is the role of the White House Press Briefings. For example, Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s press secretary, provides updates on what the administration is doing and their goals moving forward. Of course, she brings a Republican perspective—but these briefings are attended by a variety of media outlets, including many that are critical of Trump. If she were lying or presenting something that didn’t seem right for the country, wouldn’t those reporters call her out or press her harder on the issues?

Could these press briefings actually be one of the best ways to hear directly from the administration and see the media’s response in real time? Or is it better to diversify and watch multiple news sources—even if most are heavily slanted?

I’d really like to hear what others think. How do you approach finding truth in the current media landscape?

 

[The Barbarian]

It's true that Trump is a convicted felon. It's true that a court found that he sexually assaulted a woman. Which of the Ten Commandments hasn't he broken? Other than not killing someone, he's violated the others.

That's not the point; we've had despicable men as president before. Some of them actually did a pretty good job. I'm way more concerned about Trump's claim that he can deport American citizens without due process.

Even Fox News is more reliable than White House statements. And that's not entirely limited to the Trump administration.

 

[Jipsah]

I find it interesting that you say this about Trump but did you do the same when Conservative news was lying about Biden over the past few years

You mean like saying that Biden was a senile old coot who didn't know whether he was afoot or on horseback half the time? And that his staff was actually running the country? Or the more serious stuff?

 

[Jipsah]

I could wear noise canceling headphones for all the commentary and arrive at the same conclusion. He practices extortion and threats to get his way. He is verbally and psychologically abusive. He is ignorant of the law and the Constitution. He lies as frequently as other people blink. His own words, gestures, and behavior show us what kind of human being he is.

Orange Man Bad! Got it.

 

[1Tonne]

It's true that Trump is a convicted felon. It's true that a court found that he sexually assaulted a woman. Which of the Ten Commandments hasn't he broken? Other than not killing someone, he's violated the others.

I don't know of any person apart from Jesus who has not broken the Ten Commandments. If this were the qualifier to be president, then there would be none.

That's not the point; we've had despicable men as president before. Some of them actually did a pretty good job.

Agreed.

I'm way more concerned about Trump's claim that he can deport American citizens without due process.

From what I know, he has not said that he would start deporting American citizens as some have said. But I believe that he was saying that once he had dealt with getting rid of foreign terrorists from within the US, he was going to start to deal with criminals within the US who are citizens. This does not mean that he will deport them, but that he will come down hard on organised crime and gangs. They will end up in jail.

 

[Jipsah]

I'm way more concerned about Trump's claim that he can deport American citizens without due process.

I haven't seen that. You can't The infamous "Maryland Man" isn't a citizen, and has was ordered out of the country as a result of due process under the Biden admin. Chucking him out os completely proper.

Here's the deal. A natural born citizen cannot be deported. Full stop, A naturalized citizen can be deported if their citizenship is revoked as a result of due process, A noncitizen can be deported for variety of reasons, the primary one being criminal activity. That's it. So the "Trump's gonna start deporting US Citizens scare is simple hogwash. He couldn't if he wanted to.

Even Fox News is more reliable than White House statements. And that's not entirely limited to the Trump administration.

 

[Fantine]

We are all siners as you said. But very few are openly condemned by the New York State Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Catholic Community Choleric! Erupts Over Trump’s Mockery and Controversial AI Pope Pic | WATCH | EURweb
Few presidents' actions have been openly condemned before several hundred thousand people at a papal funeral.
Face it. He likes to do everything "big" and being offensive, vulgar, sacreligious, cruel, dishonest, etc., etc., etc., are things he does the "bigliest" of all.

 

[1Tonne]

We are all siners as you said. But very few are openly condemned by the New York State Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Catholic Community Choleric! Erupts Over Trump’s Mockery and Controversial AI Pope Pic | WATCH | EURweb
Few presidents' actions have been openly condemned before several hundred thousand people at a papal funeral.
Face it. He likes to do everything "big" and being offensive, vulgar, sacreligious, cruel, dishonest, etc., etc., etc., are things he does the "bigliest" of all.

Seems just like the Pharisees who condemned Jesus for doing everything "big" and being offensive, vulgar, sacrilegious, cruel, dishonest, etc., etc., etc.

 

[sanderabeer]

It raises the question: are there any truly neutral news sources left?

I suspect that "neutral" will defined 10 different ways if we as 10 people. I prefer to think in terms of informative. I ask: Does this source generally give me information from which I can reason and verify matters?

One thing I’ve been wondering about is the role of the White House Press Briefings. For example, Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s press secretary, provides updates on what the administration is doing and their goals moving forward. Of course, she brings a Republican perspective

I wouldn't call it a "Republican perspective." It might wrapped in Republican language and/or have tinges of Republican views, but it's often more uniquely "MAGA." It can have some utility even still.

but these briefings are attended by a variety of media outlets, including many that are critical of Trump. If she were lying or presenting something that didn’t seem right for the country, wouldn’t those reporters call her out or press her harder on the issues?

They do, but I worry this is getting harder (e.g., the AP News fiasco).

Could these press briefings actually be one of the best ways to hear directly from the administration and see the media’s response in real time?

If we could trust the administration, I would be more inclined to say yes. But I'm not confident we can trust them, so I'm much less inclined to say so. I would prefer as much data and information on how it was collected as possible and without the administration's analysis.

Or is it better to diversify and watch multiple news sources—even if most are heavily slanted?

I strongly prefer diversified sources.

I lived overseas for nearly a decade. I learned that people outside the US tend to have very different perspectives on America compared to Americans. I find that they are often see blind spots that we as Americans overlook.

That's why I like to read a mix of sources from different political and international perspectives.

 

[1Tonne]

I strongly prefer diversified sources.

I lived overseas for nearly a decade. I learned that people outside the US tend to have very different perspectives on America compared to Americans. I find that they are often see blind spots that we as Americans overlook.

That's why I like to read a mix of sources from different political and international perspectives.

I would agree that diversified sources are a good way to go. (Part of the reason I suggested that people watch the press briefing)
Sadly, people will often diversify by looking at different outlets that seem to have the same opinion. Which in regard to Trump, it is easy to find negative outlets a lot easier than it is to find neutral or positive outlets.

 

[Yarddog]

You mean like saying that Biden was a senile old coot who didn't know whether he was afoot or on horseback half the time?

Yeah, like Trump but the other half of the time Biden was sharp, unlike Trump who is always a senile old coot.

And that his staff was actually running the country? Or the more serious stuff?

Yeah, like Trump's first term, when his staff kept him from ruining the economy and violating the US Constitution. Now he has a bunch of cowards who cave to his will and hate the Constitution.

 

[1Tonne]

Yeah, like Trump but the other half of the time Biden was sharp, unlike Trump who is always a senile old coot.

Is that an opinion or a fact? Brainmanager, which estimates people's IQ predicts that his IQ at about 145. That makes him in the unique realm of genius. This makes you and I look like senile and old coots. LOL

Donald Trump IQ Fact Check: Unveiling the Mind Behind the Controversy

Is Donald Trump's eccentric nature a sign of a high IQ? Explore the claims and debates surrounding Trump's intelligence, examining whether his unique persona hints at remarkable intellect.

brainmanager.io

Yeah, like Trump's first term, when his staff kept him from ruining the economy and violating the US Constitution. Now he has a bunch of cowards who cave to his will and hate the Constitution.

In life, we need to keep things in perspective to stop ourselves from becoming old and bitter. You may need to start watching a variety of news channels, as it will be healthy for you.

 

[Fantine]

I think the MSM seems more biased now because it's not as if we have a president who.is even remotely presidential. Former aide John Bolton was the one, I believe, who called him "the most dangerous man on the planet." The sad part is how many staunch Republicans have said similar things--and every single one is correct.
When Trump dominates the news cycle, any objective media would seem biased, but they are just doing their jobs.

 

[The Barbarian]

I'm way more concerned about Trump's claim that he can deport American citizens without due process.

I haven't seen that.

President Trump says his administration is actively exploring a proposal to detain U.S. citizens and send them to prisons in El Salvador. Speaking Monday, minutes before a press briefing alongside El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, Trump could be heard embracing the concept.

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366178/trump-deport-jail-u-s-citizens-homegrowns-el-salvador

Here's the deal. A natural born citizen cannot be deported. Full stop,

Trump thinks you're wrong. The law says that no legal resident can be deported without due process. Trump has already ignored that. His "homegrown" comment suggests he wasn't talking about American citizens who are white. But I wouldn't depend on that.

So the "Trump's gonna start deporting US Citizens scare is simple hogwash. He couldn't if he wanted to.

He's going to try. He's already trying to find ways to justify doing it. It's worse than you think.

 

[1Tonne]

I think the MSM seems more biased now because it's not as if we have a president who is even remotely presidential.

Opinion stated as fact
He has signed 143 executive orders focusing on immigration, energy and environment, Government and Civil Service, social policy, technology and AI, etc, etc, etc. Seems pretty presidential from what I can see. In fact, his administration has most likely done more than any other administration has in the history of the United States. Please keep things in perspective by watching other media. You are accountable for the things you say.

Former aide John Bolton was the one, I believe, who called him "the most dangerous man on the planet."

Opinion stated as fact

 

[The Barbarian]

It's true that Trump is a convicted felon. It's true that a court found that he sexually assaulted a woman. Which of the Ten Commandments hasn't he broken? Other than not killing someone, he's violated the others.

I don't know of any person apart from Jesus who has not broken the Ten Commandments.

I know many people who have never sexually assaulted people, who are not convicted criminals.

From what I know, he has not said that he would start deporting American citizens as some have said.

See above. He says he's "looking into" the possibility of doing it. If you think he'll respect the law, you don't know much about him.

 

[1Tonne]

resident Trump says his administration is actively exploring a proposal to detain U.S. citizens and send them to prisons in El Salvador. Speaking Monday, minutes before a press briefing alongside El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, Trump could be heard embracing the concept.
https://www.npr.org/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366178/trump-deport-jail-u-s-citizens-homegrowns-el-salvador

What a brilliant idea. Get rid of all the criminals in your country. Criminals should have no rights as they take the rights of other people.
Wouldn't that be good to have a country that is full of people who do not steal from each other, beat each other up, or do other wrong things? Sounds like paradise to me.

He's going to try. He's already trying to find ways to justify doing it. It's worse than you think.

That would be great. I would love to have a country that stands against thieves, murderers and rapists.

I know many people who have never sexually assaulted people, who are not convicted criminals.

Look at David in the bible, he was a murderer. But God still used Him.
Have you ever hated someone? If so, you also have had murder in your heart. Have you ever undressed someone in your mind? well, then you have also violated someone.

See above. He says he's "looking into" the possibility of doing it. If you think he'll respect the law, you don't know much about him.

What a great idea. Get rid of the scum from your country and put them in another place. Sounds very biblical to me. Very similar to the Cities of Refuge that which people were banished to.

 

[Fantine]

143 executive orders--many blocked by the courts--dismantling government, violating the Constitution, wrecking the economy, making enemies out of our allies, tanking the stock market, causing a recession.
Megalomania is not predidential.