One of the left’s favorite tricks is to assert that a conservative has said something “without evidence.” The formula has become ritual, but usually it just means that the liberal employing it has no idea whether the conservative’s statement is correct, and is too lazy to try to find out. An entertaining instance comes from InstaPundit. Kyle Griffin is with MSNBC:
Which drew this response on Twitter:
Glenn Reynolds comments:
“Without evidence” now translates as “I hate Trump and I don’t want it to be true, but I’m not actually going to check because I’m too lazy and hate-filled to do actual journalism.”
Exit question: Do you think Trump made the statement because he expected this sort of reaction?
I would say the truth is somewhat worse. President Trump knows whether he was at Ground Zero, and his saying he was there is evidence. Now, an MSNBC left-winger might arbitrarily choose to disbelieve him, but that disbelief is without evidence.
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.