But when I looked into what actually was said, I found this dialogue, where a reporter actually led the Pope into a verbal trap and then reported he attacked Trump by name, which was not true.
Note, the link in the UKGuardian, which is about as left as you can get without lies.
When a Reuters reporter asked Pope Francis what he thinks of Trump’s border wall plans on the Pontiff’s flight back to Rome, the Holy Father responded that he had not heard about these plans prior, so he’d “give him the benefit of the doubt”.
But the Pope then added: “I’d just say that this man is not Christian if he said it this way.”
Pope Francis was so incredulous that such a bombastic individual could exist – or he’s so above petty repartee – that he continued speaking hypothetically rather than condemn Trump’s positions directly.
“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian,” Francis said. “This is not in the Gospel.”In other words, an ambush for a soundbite. And not only did the Pope fall into a trap, but his "spontaneous" remarks about something he just admitted he didn't know anything about made things worse.
But Drudge is right on it, pointing out that the Vatican itself has walls and security.
as for the press insisting this will harm Trump with "catholics", uh, I don't think so.
Most Catholics are Democrats and like myself won't vote for him anyway, but the conservative Catholics who actually take religion seriously will see the sound bite as the Pope interfering with the US election on a security matter, which we Catholics usually ignore, or they will wonder why he went out of his way to criticize Trump when Christians like Hillary celebrate abortion, and it is rare for bishops to interfere with elections even when "catholics" like Biden, Pelosi, the late Teddy Kennedy, and many others are pro abortion are running for office...
The article then goes on to complain that when she drives away from the border, there are road stops, and her papers checked in the USA. She blame Bush...
Yes, but that is routine: when I lived in NewMexico, this was done all the time, and that was during the Clinton administration.
I wonder if she blames Bush that cars and trucks are routinely stopped and checked for fruit and veggies when you enter California?
in the meanwhile, here in the Philippines, a quote out of context is being used to destroy Manny Paquiao.
Nothing new there. He is a born again Christian, and he is getting the full court press similar to Chickafil or Duck dynasty (I still can't find the full quote in news reports, or if what he said was in Tagalog, where it may have been slang mistranslated, or if it was in English. Manny is not exactly fluent in English...
but Ruby said the buzz in the christian circles is that he was discussing the problem of "open marriage" in gay couples, and he was only pointing out that gay couples are not faithful to their spouses (whereas animals often are). This fact, of course, is a problem that well documented in the US and in public health articles, but rarely discussed in the media).
So why is the press trying destroy a near has been boxer? Because like Erap he is beloved among the common folk here could be president someday, and he is now a born again Christian who is so serious about following Christ that he has given up his girlfriends and even cockfighting.
so there you have two big kerfuffles in the press this weekend, neither of which are actually true.
But it will keep you from noticing that China just put anti aircraft missiles in their fake islands in the West Philippine sea, and that they are not only slowly taking over the fishing grounds and potential oil/natural gas resources there, but are slowly extending their power to shut the air and sea lanes used for most shipments to Japan and Korea.
Meanwhile China continues to insist that it owns the South China Sea despite what anyone else in the neighborhood believes or international treaties say. The neighbors (especially Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines) continue to protest and build up their much smaller air and naval forces. Many Filipinos doubt that the United States would stand fast if China pushed hard. There are no signs that China is going to back down when it comes to its many territorial claims on neighbors.
nor are we the only target, as this StrategyPage article points out.
Did that get headlines?
no, because if it did, maybe someone would notice that the Obama adminstration was doing poorly in national security.
FYI: Alinsky's rules are how to manipulate an issue by picking a scapegoat and making the issue about what he said or did, in a way that defending this terrible person is impossible.
he did not misspeak, he did not get quoted out of context, and he is not a man of good will who sees things differenlty than you: He is evil, and we will search for a needle in the haystack to find something to blacken his name and make him and his opinions an outcast.
the result is a polarized community, as we see in the US, where if you oppose someone, it is not because there are nuanced ways to see it differently, but because you are evil.
An example in this is the evil tweets rejoicing at the death of Scalia, who commited the sin of actually thinking the constitution meant something, instead of finding things that aren't there to essentially pass the laws desired by the elites, ignoring nuances or even the will of the majority of Americans.
The alternative is democracy: of allowing a full discussion of the issue.
the book is here at Internet Archives is you want to read the whole thing.