# data[].attributes.body
The center of this dispute is either if trump said or didn’t say “he knew what he signed up for, but I guess it still hurt.” and if the congress woman is telling the truth on the events that took place in the car. Is this story fake or real? In my opinion from reading this article and watching the interview I could understand where anyone would take any side. Trump could’ve meant it in a reassuring way as in her husband knew and loved what he did but it still hurt there is no way in telling in which way things were interpreted. That being said I don’t believe what the congress woman said is fake. The congress woman past voting could also be looked at as in a “hypocrite” way but all the congress woman said was he was insensitive which in her mind he was insensitive to the grieving widow in front of her.

# data[].attributes.body
In the CNN article and the video there is a lot of information and opinions going around. The focus is on whether the president said to the soldier's family " He knew what he was getting into to". There is no proof whether that was a true fact or not because trump will deny it and the reporter won't back down. The point is that there isn't enough information to determine who is right. The statement might have been said but not in a hurtful manner. There are mounds of emotions going around in that situation and they may have taken it more then what it really was.

# data[].attributes.body
Based on both the article and the video provided us with information along with opinions from both sides. Therefore, the center of this dispute is focused on whether or not Trump said, "Well, I guess he know what he signed up for..." However, we can't focus on who said what or who did what because people interpret things differently. With that being said we can't say if the story is true or fake. To add on, while comparing Frederica's point of view and Trump's is confusing based on the fact that Frederica's voting records demonstrate that she is against policies that are designed to help families of veterans. Whereas, Trump mentions he has proof of what he said

# data[].attributes.body
The article and video gave more siding to Rep. Frederica Wilson giving her side of the story, although CNN did give Trump's point of view and statements it gave more evidence to back Frederica's claim up. In my opinion I do not think Frederica's claims are true taking into account her voting record which comes to show that she, for the most part votes against policies that are designed to help the families of veterans. There is also no solid evidence that Trump said that, for example the widow has not came forward and agreed with the representative's statement.

# data[].attributes.body
In this CNN article, both perspectives were taken from the White House and the witnesses of the phone call even though it was mentioned that It was a private conversation. All of the statements made seem to be consistent so I believe they are true statements whether the congresswoman or trump is telling the truth, we can't really tell for sure. Something that you have to account for is that one is a grieving widow ant the other had no personal relationship with the victim. So from Trump's perspective, he might have been looking to relate with her or understand her situation while the grieving widow saw it as hurtful and uncomforting. Regarding the congresswoman, she had briefly overheard part of the conversation and I think you have to take into account the way things are said because communication isn't only through words but body language and the tone they are said in. She might have seen herself as defending the widow but because of her personal beliefs and voting rituals, it might have been best for the conversation to be accounted for just through the wife and president Trump to ensure that the quarrel wasn't miscommunicated.

# data[].attributes.body
The article and video provide a lot of information on the subject of what was said it states both sides of the story Trump and what the women had said, but there is no actual facts on what happened.

# data[].attributes.body
The article and video provided by CNN provides us with information towards both sides involving Trump and Frederica Wilson. Although it may or may not be fully accurate. Rep. Wilson may have overheard the conversation but she may have interpreted it the wrong way or she may have not. We do not fully know the whole story. After looking at her past records it shows that she it very deeply invested in the lives of others which could of led her to interpreted what Trump said in a different way.

# data[].attributes.body
The center of this dispute is whether or not Trump said," Well, I guess he knew what he signed up for, but i guess it still hurt." Both the article and the video provide enough information for the audience. However, there is no concrete evidence on either side.

# data[].attributes.body
Both the article and video/interview provided by CNN allow the audience to receive enough information in order to form an opinion or perspective on the issue. It seems that both sides of the argument are controversial and are strictly fueled by pure emotion -- there is no concrete evidence from either side. This is a situation in which the reader can take the information in whichever way they want, seeing as there are many unanswered questions and claims, but no real evidence -- even the White House failed to record the call.

# data[].attributes.body
The center of this dispute in my opinion is what the things were said from the widower was true or not. Trump argues that there was things that was untrue. I think there is a lot more to see to decide if this is a true or fake story, we need more information.

# data[].attributes.body
The CNN article provides all the information on the subject, as well as opinions from both sides. Even still, it doesn't give readers the information needed to deduce whether the claim is accurate or not, simply because there isn't any period. This means the congress woman could be politicizing the issue in an attempt to take a shot at Trump. She admitted she didn't hear the entire conversation, meaning his words, if portrayed accurately, could've been taken out of context. She has, in the past, voted against Trump's republican healthcare bill, and actually against provisions that would benefit the the families of veterans. Although her statement could very well be true, her past stances on military issues, and the fact her statements were full of opinions more than certainties, raises the question of whether she is recalling the story truthfully, or only trying to stir up controversy.

# data[].attributes.body
In my perspective of the article and the video I would say that this is real news. The article has all the information needed and has all the sources listed. The article states that Trump sent out a tweet about him not saying what the women had said and the tweet is real which means the information provided was true. Even though he didn't claim saying what he did maybe he had just said it but not intentionally to hurt the women's feelings and now regretting what he said he doesn't want that out in the open.