I think the title of the story is misleading. Baker didn’t say he will not report Trump’s lies even if they’re lies. He merely said that if they think Trump lies, they will not call him a liar, but they will investigate what Trump said and publish the results of the investigation and let the …
This sentence makes my brain hurt, and I’m not criticizing you, as you were not the initial speaker of it. I’m just saying it makes no sense, if you think about it. The WSJ will not call Trump a liar if he lies — but that’s okay because lies aren’t really lies, if they might be true, which they might, if we just pretend they aren’t by reporting the lies and the truth and say flip a coin and we’ll maybe then, the lie will turn into the truth-this is a stupid conversation!
There is no need to even make the statement, that WSJ will not call Trump a liar — everyone who has a functioning brain already knows Trump is a liar. And anyone who thinks Trump is truthful, is living in a fantasy brought on by anxiety due to the faltering country and political system.
Why make the statement at all? In an attempt to convince people that lies are the new black? That they are somehow cool now? Lies are not to be questioned anymore. Whatever. People will simply tune out. Most aren’t so stupid that they don’t know when they are being blatantly lied to. Unless they want fantasy reinforcement, which a lot of people do, so there is that, but they don’t really need the WSJ for that. They got Fox and Briebart.