,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
The Post's media reporter, @farhip, writes about a "late-dawning recognition by mainstream news organizations, which until fairly recently shied away..." The recognition? The president is a chronic liar and does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/styl…
"The Times’s executive editor, Dean Baquet, has said his newsroom strives to use the word [lie] 'judiciously' because using it repeatedly 'could feed the mistaken notion that we’re taking political sides.' Alt reasoning: if Trump lies repeatedly, then you use the word repeatedly.
Here is @ddale8 on using the terms lie and liar. This was never a question of "is it accurate to say he lies?" It was never about truthtelling at all. The entire debate was how about how to report the truth and yet APPEAR innocent, unbiased, unaligned. That's what took time. 
Taking four years to wake up to his chronic lying means that recognition of this fact is dim, as well: His refusal to be briefed, the undermining of climate science, his contempt for intelligence agencies, the put down of diplomacy, attacks on the press, his lying— all one thing.
That the press got hung up on intent — "how can we know his intent?" — was striking to me because in the savvy style of analysis nothing is more quotidian than journalists at the capital confidently revealing a politician's intent during some run-of-the-mill strategy discussion.
