-88

Tim Walz Said He Was in Hong Kong in 1989 During Tiananmen. Not True. (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 2 months ago by ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As recently as February, Mr. Walz said on a podcast that he had been in Hong Kong, then a British colony, “on June 4 when Tiananmen happened,” and decided to cross into mainland China to take up his teaching duties even though many people were urging him not to.

But it was not true. Mr. Walz, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, indeed taught at a high school in China as part of a program sending American teachers abroad, but he did not actually travel to the country until August 1989.

Why bother making something like this up?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[+] Veedem@lemmy.world -6 points 2 months ago

I’m not a fan of the “whataboutism” that’s bound to pop up in these replies. I like Walz quite a bit, but he got caught in a lie and it’s good to call both sides on things like this. It reminds them that we’re paying attention.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 months ago

Absolutely, but it's important to measure lies by their impact - this is a rather irrelevant lie while "Hatians are eating your pets" caused an outbreak of xenophobia and domestic terrorism.

Both are bad - one is clearly worse.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

I wouldn't call what Walz did necessarily a lie.

A lie requires an intent to deceive. August vs that spring is close enough in a general sense, and he wasn't saying he was physically at tianamen square. Especially when you consider that the massacre kicked off a lot of riots and unrest which likely continued while he was there.

Trying to spark off a race war on multiple occasions with multiple, intentional, falsehoods vs over-generalizations are not the same thing.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 months ago

It's such an irrelevant fact check though. He didn't lie about the actual thing that made the story (going into China shortly after Tiananmen), but they got him on where he was when he decided to go? It's disappointing that his story isn't pristinely accurate, but it's not actually an important detail of it. It's like fact-checking Kerry's military service and focusing on which town he was living in when he signed up.

This just looks like NYT trying to find equivalent numbers of falsehoods so they can prove they're not biased.

this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2024

-88 points (6.0% liked)

politics

19238 readers

3087 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News