My comment at the New York Times, see:
Will we never learn? This is “double-speak!” A raw position followed by what looks like a walk-back – and sadly, taken for one – but actually a technique to disseminate the original position and get away with it. The word “adopted” accepts belief in actual change:
Raw: Kellyanne Conway, his counselor, contributed to the combative mood …when she described the falsehoods … as “alternative facts.”
Walk-back: However, Mr. Trump later “adopted” the more above-it-all demeanor that presidents typically take. “Peaceful protests are a hallmark of our democracy … Even if I don’t always agree, I recognize the rights of people to express their views.”” Really?
The original is what matters, and the walk-back, in this case a lie, should not EVER, at face value, be “accepted” as honest. “Adopted” means subscription to what is adopted. There has been no adoption! We see this pattern over and over again, ad infinitum. It’s time to recognize what we are seeing as “double-speak!”
There is no need to violate journalistic decorum. We can’t know what’s in his head and can’t, and therefore should not, call him a liar. But we shouldn’t credit a disingenuous follow-up as a walk-back. We don’t have to use words like “accepted” that bestow honor. All we have to say is “Mr. Trump later “tweeted” the more above-it-all demeanor …” He’ll probably go nuts if we do that, but then we’ll know we hit the nail on the head!
Let’s please not give credit where credit it is NOT due!