I watched the State of the Union so you don't have to (probably should have warned you in advance - sorry about that!), and I checked if anything Trump said was true.

Here's the result.

As you know, we occasionally go back and take a second look at fallacies we've explored before, but we're never going to get to them all, and we keep seeing examples out there, so we thought we'd gather some together in some special episodes. Kind of like this one.

As you know, we occasionally go back and take a second look at fallacies we've explored before, but we're never going to get to them all, and we keep seeing examples out there, so we thought we'd gather some together in some special episodes. Kind of like this one.

As you know, we occasionally go back and take a second look at fallacies we've explored before, but we're never going to get to them all, and we keep seeing examples out there, so we thought we'd gather some together in some special episodes. Kind of like this one.

In the one-hundred-and-eighty-ninth episode, we explore the Sanctimony Fallacy, starting with Trump calling Democrats immoral for their stance on abortion, and claiming he did the right thing regarding Roe v Wade.

In Mark's British Politics Corner, we look at Kemi Badenoch justifying the kidnapping of Maduro, the morality of Zack Polanksi's former profession as a hypnotist, and David Cameron hypocritically attacking Jimmy Carr's offshore tax affairs.

In the Fallacy in the Wild section, we check out examples from Witness, The Big Bang Theory, and Ted 2.

Jim and Mark go head to head in Fake News, the game in which Mark has to guess which one of three Trump quotes Jim made up.

Then we talk about the murder of Renee Nicole Good by ICE agents in Minnesota.

And finally, we round up some of the other crazy Trump stories from the past week.

The full show notes for this episode can be found at https://fallacioustrump.com/ft189

You can contact the guys at pod@fallacioustrump.com, on BlueSky @FallaciousTrump, Discord at fallacioustrump.com/discord or facebook at facebook.com/groups/fallacioustrump

And you can buy our T-shirts here: https://fallacioustrump.com/tee

Happy New Year! We're currently watching Airplane vs Volcano, a terrible Dean Cain movie, and breaking it down for our Patrons in great detail. In the spirit of the season, we thought it should be shared with more of you, so here's the second part of our breakdown, just in case you're interested. It's part scholarly film theory analysis, part snarky nitpicking, part exasperated diatribe.

There's a LOT to hate about this film, so there's plenty more on our Patreon at patreon.com/ftrump if you just can't get enough... We're sorry.

In the one-hundred-and-eighty-eighth episode, we explore the Argumentum Ad Feminam, starting with a montage of Trump attacking women.

In Mark's British Politics Corner, we look at Diane Abbott reporting on the daily abuse she gets over social media, Harriet Harman on why she didn't get appointed Deputy PM, and why women like her threaten misogynists, and Kemi Badenoch attacking women who complain about being attacked.

In the Fallacy in the Wild section, we check out examples from Star Wars, Anchorman, and Cheers.

Jim and Mark go head to head in a special Christmas edition of Fake News, in which Mark has to guess which absurdly sycophantic remarks were made up by Jim and which were lavished on Trump by his acolytes.

Then we talk about the heavily redacted and incomplete Epstein files.

And finally, we round up some of the other crazy Trump stories from the past week.

The full show notes for this episode can be found at https://fallacioustrump.com/ft188

You can contact the guys at pod@fallacioustrump.com, on BlueSky @FallaciousTrump, Discord at fallacioustrump.com/discord or facebook at facebook.com/groups/fallacioustrump

And you can buy our T-shirts here: https://fallacioustrump.com/tee

Merry Christmas! We're currently watching Airplane vs Volcano, a terrible Dean Cain movie, and breaking it down for our Patrons in great detail. In the spirit of the season, we thought it should be shared with more of you, so here's the first part of our breakdown, just in case you're interested. It's part scholarly film theory analysis, part snarky nitpicking, part exasperated diatribe.

There's a LOT to hate about this film, so there'll be more on New Year's Day. We're sorry.