Giuliani says there were 63 murders in Chicago over the weekend. That’s five times the actual count.

[tulc]

Ok I'll directly address the OP. Do you know for a fact Mr. Giuliani posted that himself? Do you know for a fact that his intent was to lie? Do you know for a fact that there was no mistake made? If you don't know these for FACTS, then aren't you assuming facts not in evidence, e.g. hearsay?

Edit: I will note that you can't even bring yourself to address the questions brought against your argument.

see post #19.
tulc(hopes that helps)

 

[tulc]

you are slaming Giuliani for a mistake he made.....(snip of things not related to the thread)

Not slamming him, pointing out something he lied about. If he doesn't want a lie being pointed out he shouldn't post it where people can see and address it.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

 

[NW82]

Good. But since you read it, why didn't you address what the OP was about?


No you did not, but then you didn't actually address the OP did you?

No, if you had asked "Why was he so wring about that?" or maybe: "Why didn't he issue a correction once he found out he was wrong about how many people were killed?" Those would have been question that were related to the OP. what you asked was

which isn't actually about the OP at all. See the difference?


This thread isn't about gun control, if you'd like to discuss that you should start a thread about it.


Good advice for us all.


Sure did, but when a correction wasn't issued or the tweet taken down? That's when I knew it was done on purpose. An honest person, when he discovers something he said was wrong, is confronted by a choice: he can admit he was wrong and correct it, or he can stop pretending he's an honest person. It really is that simple.


neither "I" nor "conservative ideals" are the subject of this thread, if you'd like to discuss either of those subjects perhaps you should start a thread about them where they can be discussed?
tulc(thinks there's a lot of subjects people want to discuss that they could start threads about being brought up in thread not about those subjects)

Way to avoid the rebuttal by saying "start another thread", when in fact you opened the door with your OP.

 

[NW82]

Not slamming him, pointing out something he lied about. If he doesn't want a lie being pointed out he shouldn't post it where people can see and address it.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

You cannot prove it was a lie!!! You simply refuse to accept that it could be a mistake. You are assuming!

 

[Traveling teacher]

Not slamming him, pointing out something he lied about. If he doesn't want a lie being pointed out he shouldn't post it where people can see and address it.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

everyone on this blog has answered your question....
which is basically ...
did Guiliani lie on purpose....???

everyone agrees HE DID NOT....on purpose....

even the article which is slanted against trump says he probably misread and made a mistake....
they were trying to say he is not in tune with inner city violence to think 63 could get killed in a weekend.....

you are probably the only one in America who thinks he lied on purpose.....
so thats your answer that you dont wont to hear.....

 

[tulc]

You cannot prove it was a lie!!! You simply refuse to accept that it could be a mistake. You are assuming!

If it was a mistake, why not issue a correction? It becomes a lie when even after you've been shown it's wrong you don't fix it. And that is what the thread is about.
tulc(hopes that helps)

 

[Traveling teacher]

If it was a mistake, why not issue a correction? It becomes a lie when even after you've been shown it's wrong you don't fix it. And that is what the thread is about.
tulc(hopes that helps)

reread your own article....

the whole purpose of that article was to point out that Guliani is out of touch with inner city violence.....
because if he was in touch with whats going on he would have known that 63 people dont get killed in a weekend in chicago....

quoate from article:
It is possible Giuliani may have confused shootings with murders. Or, he may have simply been misinformed. Or, he may have made it all up. It’s impossible to tell, though it is worth noting that Giuliani’s numbers were quickly and widely called into question by news reports yet he did not seek to clarify them or delete his tweets.

But Giuliani is not only a former New York mayor, he was also once a crime-busting U.S. attorney in that city. If anyone should have a feel for what is real and unreal when it comes to urban violence, it’s Giuliani.

Yet he disseminated a wildly exaggerated claim, and that is why we rate it Pants on Fire!

 

[tulc]

everyone on this blog has answered your question....
which is basically ...
did Guiliani lie on purpose....???

everyone agrees HE DID NOT....on purpose....

Doesn't matter if he made a mistake, or if he mispoke. I'm not sure why people keep saying it does. Let me see if I can explain: if Traveling Teacher posted a thread where he said: "tulc drank 14 cups of decaff coffee last night!!" and then someone wrote to you and said: "No, what happened was someone offered tulc 14 cups of decaff and he said no to everyone of them!" would you then:
A) go on the thread and say "Wow, I'm really sorry but I made a mistake and tulc did NOT drink 14 cups of decaff last night, someone merely offered him those 14 cups."
or would you:
B) say nothing and just let the wrong information stand, because...reasons.
Which of those situations would you say was a lie and which one would be the truth?

(snip because it doesn't apply to the thread)

you are probably the only one in America who thinks he lied on purpose.....

It literally doesn't matter if he lied on purpose or not, what he's getting the pants on fire for is he's lying because he didn't fix the mistake after he was shown to be wrong.

so thats your answer that you dont wont to hear.....

I'm not the subject of this thread.
tulc(is sort of flattered people keep trying to make it about him)

 

[Phil 1:21]

Glad you agree.
tulc(likes finding common ground with people)

It wasn’t an agreement; it was a restatement. But you already knew that.

 

[Phil 1:21]

hmmm...I see no one wants to actually address the OP, that's okay, some people seem to want to make threads about something it's not instead of simply starting a thread about what they want to talk about.
tulc(wonders why that is?)

Maybe because we’re appalled that someone who claims to be a Christian would feel a misstatement about 63 people being shot is worse than shooting 63 people, killing 11 of them.

 

[tulc]

Way to avoid the rebuttal by saying "start another thread", when in fact you opened the door with your OP.

Not sure that's accurate, since you didn't address the OP.
tulc(doesn't understand peoples reluctance to start threads to discuss the things they want to discuss)

 

[tulc]

It wasn’t an agreement; it was a restatement. But you already knew that.

Wait...so you think it's okay to exploit a tragedy to further a political agenda not connected to the tragedy?
tulc(is getting a little confused by this)

 

[tulc]

Maybe because we’re appalled that someone who claims to be a Christian would feel a misstatement about 63 people being shot is worse than shooting 63 people, killing 11 of them.

Wow...that sounds like a horrible person. Do they post on CF?
tulc(maybe Phil 1:21 should start a thread about that subject?)

 

[Traveling teacher]

face it:
if he lied on purpose....he is the biggest idiot in NY......
and guliani is no idiot
https://www.city-journal.org/html/how-new-york-became-safe-full-story-13197.html
Just 20 years ago, New York City was racked with crime: murders, burglaries, drug deals, car thefts, thefts from cars....
Grand Central Terminal, a gigantic flophouse; the Port Authority Bus Terminal, “a grim gauntlet for bus passengers dodging beggars, drunks, thieves, and destitute drug addicts,” as the New York Times put it in 1992
New York’s drop in crime during the 1990s was correspondingly astonishing—indeed, “one of the most remarkable stories in the history of urban crime, according to University of California law professor Franklin Zimring

Guliani was mayor in NY city from 1994-2001.....
before he got in NY was had one of the worst crime records of cities in america...almost like Gotham city......
when he left it was and still is the biggest success stories in inner city america in our lifetime....

this is why they slammed him because he accomplished what they cannot in Chicago... and refuse to support a strong police force....

 

[tulc]

face it:
if he lied on purpose....he is the biggest idiot in NY......
and guliani is no idiot (snip, not about the OP)

hmmm..did he issue a correction? Admit he was wrong about how many people were killed? Or did he just ignore it and move on to something else?
tulc(is just wondering)

 

[Phil 1:21]

Maybe because we’re appalled that someone who claims to be a Christian would feel a misstatement about 63 people being shot is worse than shooting 63 people, killing 11 of them.

Wow...that sounds like a horrible person. Do they post on CF?

The shootings were bad, lying about it to make a political point is even worse.

 

[Steve Petersen]

All this outrage, but none for the DEMOCRAT MAYOR who RUNS THIS TOWN!

 

[tulc]

All this outrage, but none for the DEMOCRAT MAYOR who RUNS THIS TOWN!

Oh I don't know, it seems a lot of people in this thread are outraged at him.
tulc(so there's that)

 

[tulc]

huh...guess I misspoke, here let me correct that post.
tulc(wouldn't want people to get the wrong idea)

 

[Traveling teacher]

Guianni is an american hero who set the bar for bringing law and order to a crime filled city of america...

the mayor of chicago ramains nameless in my post.......
as he is no american hero.....