Rudy Giuliani says 'truth isn't truth'

[tulc]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/19/politics/rudy-giuliani-truth-isnt-truth/index.html

Rudy Giuliani, President Donald Trump's attorney, said Sunday that "truth isn't truth" when explaining that he won't let special counsel Robert Mueller rush Trump into testifying because he doesn't want investigators to trap the President into a lie.

"When you tell me that, you know, he should testify because he's going to tell the truth and he shouldn't worry, well, that's so silly because it's somebody's version of the truth. Not the truth," Giuliani told NBC's Chuck Todd on Sunday morning during "Meet the Press."


"Truth is truth," Todd said in response.
"No, no, it isn't truth," Giuliani said. "Truth isn't truth. The President of the United States says, "I didn't ..."
"Truth isn't truth?" Todd interjected. "Mr. Mayor, do you realize, what ... I think this is going to become a bad meme."
"No, no, no ... don't do this to me," Giuliani said.
"Don't do 'truth isn't truth' to me," Todd continues.
"Donald Trump says I didn't talk about [former national security adviser Michael] Flynn with [then-FBI Director James] Comey. Comey says you did talk about it. So tell me what the truth is," Giuliani said.

tulc(doesn't think that sounds very accurate)

 

[Tom 1]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/19/politics/rudy-giuliani-truth-isnt-truth/index.html

tulc(doesn't think that sounds very accurate)

He’s got a point, regardless of what mix of true or false claims Trump would make in an interview, he’d make a mess of it and give the investigators plenty of material to tie him up with. He thinks he’s smart enough to run rings around them, in reality his inability to cope with anything complex would make it easy for the team to goad him into contradictory statements and at least some admission of wrongdoing.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/19/politics/rudy-giuliani-truth-isnt-truth/index.html

tulc(doesn't think that sounds very accurate)

I believe most sincere congratulations are in order to Mr. Giuliani.

This is most accurate description ever made of Trump Administration.

 

[Chesterton]

Depends on what is is.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Reminds me of the lawyer situation where the prosecution say's something along the lines of:

"I want a simple, yes or no to the question: did you have sexual relations with the woman?"

and the man on the witness stand replies:

"yes, but..." *and he is interrupted by the prosecution*

"that's all, just a simple yes or no will do"

When all along an explanation in context would vindicate the defense, just as this could be a context for when "truth isn't truth".

 

[Hank77]

Giuliani has been speaking about Comey in the news lately. Last week, Giuliani told CNN's Jake Tapper that if the President sits down for questioning by special counsel Mueller, Trump will say he never discussed easing up on a probe of former national security adviser Flynn with Comey.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/19/politics/rudy-giuliani-truth-isnt-truth/index.html

Too bad one of them, Trump or Comey don't have a tape, truth is truth. Oh, wait, didn't Trump at one time insinuate that he did have a tape?
Maybe Comey isn't very smart. Maybe Comey would lie about the President when he knows that he could have been taped, especially seeing what the context of the conversation was.

After he fired former FBI Director James Comey, the New York Times reported that Trump had asked Comey to pledge his loyalty during a private dinner — an account that Comey confirmed but Trump denied. One day after that story was published, Trump tweeted, “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”


Trump later admitted that there were no tapes of Comey and claimed he had simply been speculating that someone else might have recorded their conversation at the White House.
cnn.com

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Giuliani has been speaking about Comey in the news lately. Last week, Giuliani told CNN's Jake Tapper that if the President sits down for questioning by special counsel Mueller, Trump will say he never discussed easing up on a probe of former national security adviser Flynn with Comey.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/19/politics/rudy-giuliani-truth-isnt-truth/index.html

Too bad one of them, Trump or Comey don't have a tape, truth is truth. Oh, wait, didn't Trump at one time insinuate that he did have a tape?
Maybe Comey isn't very smart. Maybe Comey would lie about the President when he knows that he could have been taped, especially seeing what the context of the conversation was.

After he fired former FBI Director James Comey, the New York Times reported that Trump had asked Comey to pledge his loyalty during a private dinner — an account that Comey confirmed but Trump denied. One day after that story was published, Trump tweeted, “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”


Trump later admitted that there were no tapes of Comey and claimed he had simply been speculating that someone else might have recorded their conversation at the White House.
cnn.com

Trump lied? In other news sky is blue.

 

[Hank77]

Reminds me of the lawyer situation where the prosecution say's something along the lines of:

"I want a simple, yes or no to the question: did you have sexual relations with the woman?"

and the man on the witness stand replies:

"yes, but..." *and he is interrupted by the prosecution*

"that's all, just a simple yes or no will do"

When all along an explanation in context would vindicate the defense, just as this could be a context for when "truth isn't truth".

I can agree with your scenario, but Giuliani is saying that Trump's truth is not Comey's truth. Either that conversation took place as Comey says it did or it didn't.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Reminds me of the lawyer situation where the prosecution say's something along the lines of:

"I want a simple, yes or no to the question: did you have sexual relations with the woman?"

and the man on the witness stand replies:

"yes, but..." *and he is interrupted by the prosecution*

"that's all, just a simple yes or no will do"

When all along an explanation in context would vindicate the defense, just as this could be a context for when "truth isn't truth".

Great spin work. I think you should have pride in this. But it does not make any sense. Nowhere do you give evidence that "truth isn't truth."

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I can agree with your scenario, but Giuliani is saying that Trump's truth is not Comey's truth. Either that conversation took place as Comey says it did or it didn't.

What we don't know is the objective truth of it, we've only heard conflicting subjective "truths" from two conflicting sources, he said she said kind of thing, in a situation where both sources may have objectively lied, for different reasons. I'll be glad when the political air is fresher and clearer, seems to be a bit muddled thus far on that scenario. One thing seems to be clear to me, neither man trusted the other, so naturally I doubt either would put all their cards out on the table and be forthright.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

What we don't know is the objective truth of it, we've only heard conflicting subjective "truths" from two conflicting sources, he said she said kind of thing, in a situation where both sources may have objectively lied, for different reasons. I'll be glad when the political air is fresher and clearer, seems to be a bit muddled thus far on that scenario. One thing seems to be clear to me, neither man trusted the other, so naturally I doubt either would put all their cards out on the table and be forthright.

They may have different interpretating of experiences but none of this makes "truth isn't truth".

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Great spin work. I think you should have pride in this. But it does not make any sense. Nowhere do you give evidence that "truth isn't truth."

Allow me to spin again, have you ever heard "what's true for you is not true for me?", yes it is relativism, and yes many minds often think in these terms. Journalists for mainstream news media outlets often report a mixture of facts and opinions, making it difficult to sort the objective and the subjective, and confusing the two they convince themselves their subjective opinions are consistent with objective facts, such that they own their subjective opinions as truth and every so often (quite often these days) their "truth" is found to be not truth. So it is helpful to distinguish between objective truth, and subjective truth, when considering what "truth isn't truth" can mean.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Allow me to spin again, have you ever heard "what's true for you is not true for me?", yes it is relativism, and yes many minds often think in these terms. Journalists for mainstream news media outlets often report a mixture of facts and opinions, making it difficult to sort the objective and the subjective, and confusing the two they convince themselves their subjective opinions are consistent with objective facts, such that they own their subjective opinions as truth and every so often (quite often these days) their "truth" is found to be not truth. So it is helpful to distinguish between objective truth, and subjective truth, when considering what "truth isn't truth" can mean.

This is much better explanation for me to understand. Thank you for taking time.

But you still have not shown "truth isn't truth". You have shown that different people can have different opinion of experience. This is different thing.

This is not Trump problem. Trump problem is that he lies about almost everything. Giuliani knows this. So when he states "truth isn't truth" he means "Trump lies so much he would be caught not telling truth".

President Trump has made 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

This is much better explanation for me to understand. Thank you for taking time.

But you still have not shown "truth isn't truth". You have shown that different people can have different opinion of experience. This is different thing.

Uh yes I have shown you, but maybe repeating the same line enough times will reinforce your dissenting opinion. Oftentimes statements in isolation without context are misconstrued. The purpose of my first post in this thread was a feeble attempt to demonstrate how in legal investigation, all that may be required to achieve the intended results is asking loaded questions, or as in my example, omitting the context.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Uh yes I have shown you, but maybe repeating the same line enough times will reinforce your dissenting opinion.

That is classic Trump skill when he wants people to believe the lies. Like Russian investigation is "Witch Hunt".

Oftentimes statements in isolation without context are misconstrued. The purpose of my first post in this thread was a feeble attempt to demonstrate how in legal investigation, all that may be required to achieve the intended results is asking loaded questions, or in my example, omitting the context.

As I said this is not Trump problem. Trump problem is he lies so much and so poorly he would get caught. Trump is terrible liar. Like "Mexico will pay for wall". Anyone with some thinking can see through his many lies easily. It has nothing to do with the context.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

It has nothing to do with the context.

And you know this how? To know this you would have to know the questions being asked, which I seriously doubt.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

And you know this how? To know this you would have to know the questions being asked, which I seriously doubt.

I do not need to know context. Trump lies so much and so poorly that he would be caught. This is the problem for Trump. Giuliani knows it.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

President Trump has made 4,229 false or misleading claims in 558 days

I see, washingtonpost has a copyright on objective truth, they have carefully analyzed each and every claim to be certain they are telling the truth and not a lie themselves. I find such a claim dubious and misleading on the surface. What do you suppose is the intent behind such an article? Golly because they are so concerned with objective truth?

“Ya double-crossers! I’m a-comin’ back, and I ain’t comin back to play marbles!” - Yosemite Sam

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

I see, washingtonpost has a copyright on objective truth, they have carefully analyzed each and every claim to be certain they are telling the truth and not a lie themselves. I find such a claim dubious and misleading on the surface. What do you suppose is the intent behind such an article? Golly because they are so concerned with objective truth?

“Ya double-crossers! I’m a-comin’ back, and I ain’t comin back to play marbles!” - Yosemite Sam

No. Point is Trump lies constantly and poorly. Much to his base. This is undeniable.

For the example: "Mexico will pay for wall". This was so ridiculous anyone who gave 30 seconds thought knew this was the lie the second he said it.

Or "I will drain the swamp!". Anyone who knew anything about Trump history knew he would make swamp much bigger. Of course he did that.

Or that Trump thinks some Neo Nazis and KKK are "very fine people". I think this is maybe what you are talking about? I would make argument that Trump is wrong here. Neo Nazis and KKK who are chanting racist slogans during march which kills innocent woman are not "very fine people".

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I do not need to know context. Trump lies so much and so poorly that he would be caught. This is the problem for Trump. Giuliani knows it.

Lying seems to be a common problem of man, since well, the beginning of man. Is there a lie-o-meter secretly installed in the oval office? Just kidding, no lie, only kidding. If I said 50 have read this response, would it be a lie or an exaggeration or am I rounding numbers, giving an estimate?