- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
You just dont get it, they are doing the same thing, but they are liberals so its like way worse.
Balanced and unbiased opinion.
US political crisis
- Thread starter The Dude
- Start date
You just dont get it, they are doing the same thing, but they are liberals so its like way worse.
Balanced and unbiased opinion.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
Anyway.. If anyone wants to know why the (far) right needs to deflect right now it's because of this dude:
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
No, it's a bigger news story because the left go on about how virtuous they are, and I think CNN probably take bias to greater lengths/obsession than fox, it's in the nature of the people who favour 'thought control' of the public, and that's the left/liberal cause these days, trying to 'correct' and police everyone's views and opinions.
When you go down that route you end up lying and being hypocritical.
If a lying right wing media is dangerous which liberals have said for years, then how can a lying left wing media not also be dangerous, but it's not always obvious to people the ways in which it is dangerous, because they cloak everything in the intention of being 'virtuous' and 'progressive'. Mainly though they are fueling divisive identity politics, winning elections on the back of it.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
Really? You haven't watched Hannity and Tucker in a while I guess?
I'm progressive and far from virtuous, I'll call out mofos when I see them. Like a Trump flag said:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I'm not really that concerned re Gaetz, if he was a flag bearer for the trump style brand of populist politics, he loses the role if significant wrong doing is found. He was a bit too good to be true perhaps, youngish and with a refreshing approach to interviews and politics etc..but hiding more immoral behaviour in the background - but not confirmed as yet I believe.
[edit: I say significant wrondoing, but it is anything above mild stuff, however tbh don't really know what would count as mild wrongdoing for a politician, not paying a parking fine or speeding, something like that I guess]
It would be good though if the moral standards being applied to him were being equally insisted upon across the rest of politics and individuals in political life. Because I cannot believe he's the only one who's been up to no good, is he receiving worse treatment from the media/authorities because he is seen as a trump ally?
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
Really? You haven't watched Hannity and Tucker in a while I guess?
I'm progressive and far from virtuous, I'll call out mofos when I see them. Like a Trump flag said:
'feelings' is not really the nub of it, when we're talking about distortion, deliberate misrepresentation, that's in the realm of dishonesty and being immoral, so it doesn't tie up surely with being overall 'progressive' and 'morally good' etc..
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
Every country has problems, we label things left and right, but it comes down to what is causing the problems and what is the best way to remove or reduce them and improve things.
Surely you have to apply the approach across the board: education, crime, health, employment opportunites etc.. perhaps there's room for a mix of left and right type of ideas, but a bit like science if an idea doesn't get good enough results after a decent go it should probably be binned.
Life and politics are so complicated these days, I don't think it is going to get any simpler either unfortunately.
Surely you have to apply the approach across the board: education, crime, health, employment opportunites etc.. perhaps there's room for a mix of left and right type of ideas, but a bit like science if an idea doesn't get good enough results after a decent go it should probably be binned.
Life and politics are so complicated these days, I don't think it is going to get any simpler either unfortunately.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Life is only as complicated as you make it.
If you have a problem you cant fix, worrying about it wont help.
If its a problem you can fix, then no need to worry, just fix it.
Or in other words, there are no worries.
If you have a problem you cant fix, worrying about it wont help.
If its a problem you can fix, then no need to worry, just fix it.
Or in other words, there are no worries.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
I vote well go Lord of the Flies on this shitLife is only as complicated as you make it.
If you have a problem you cant fix, worrying about it wont help.
If its a problem you can fix, then no need to worry, just fix it.
Or in other words, there are no worries.
View attachment 153676
ps, 'not it' on Piggy
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
I think doing lord of the flies on a global scale would get nukey very quickly.
And then we all end up being Piggy.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
- Location
- the land of snow and maple syrup
dibs on radiaton hulk mode, not gross walking zombie mode
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Im no expert on mutations caused by radiation, but i feel fairly confident in saying that its probably a 'take what you get' kind of deal.
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
I took just a few minutes to look at your Sourcewatch link and it tickled me pink that it is your source of reference for fact checking.
My first search was "Bill Gates"
There is not one critical reference and some links are dead. But this abso-bloody- lutely beautiful link did work
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
I almost fell of my chair laughing
And folk still do not believe who funds these sites
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
You seem to have trouble even reading the contents of your own link in relation to the original accusations and the original headline.
It is an admission that the story was fake while still attempting to paint him as doing something wrong
"Sex trafficking minors".
The accusation was that he was flying an under age girl around for the purpose of having sex with her.
It says that a big group of people took 2 private jets to the Bahamas and instead of going with them he took a commercial flight. So he did not travel with them!
Unverified stuff about a source stating that they where stopped at customs questioning the age of 3 of the women? What? Where they having sex at customs? Where these 3 women in distress?
The article also states " The former minor" What? I think that anyone above the age of 17 can be called a former minor!
It goes on to admit that all on the trip where above the age of 18. In fact she was about 2 months away from 19.
The article admits that no person on the trip was involved with prostitution.
The accusation that he was involved on the trip with anything sinister with Greenberg was totally unfounded because Greenberg was not even on that trip!
It boiled down to a group of consenting adults taking two private jets and a commercial flight to go on holiday.
Why not actually read the article that you present as evidence of wrongdoing instead of just reading the way the article still tries to present him as questionable?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Saw this segment this morning: See if you can spot the propaganda. edit: (I should say can you separate the facts from the propaganda)
Here is a couple right off the bat. Those statements are opinion/speculation not fact.
The first line from Poppy Harlow: "Could spell quite a bit of trouble", The reporter Paula Reid: "Could be of interest to the justice department"
Here is a couple right off the bat. Those statements are opinion/speculation not fact.
The first line from Poppy Harlow: "Could spell quite a bit of trouble", The reporter Paula Reid: "Could be of interest to the justice department"
- Joined
- May 23, 2015
- Location
- Belfast
As others say, you are missing the real point - you’re only allowed to be accused of anything of this nature if your name is either Biden or Hunter.
If it’s neither then shame on anyone trying to make this man answer for any potentially questionable actions...
KasinoKiller
Newbie member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2020
- Location
- uk
Trump is the only guy stupid enough to ever lose money running a casino yet 73 million of these daft yankee twats voted for him
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2015
- Location
- South
it is very rash of you to say...
he is a technical guy. Nothing to do with what goes on the screen. He has no say.
I worked at a tv station, news division....please stop making it sound like he has any power or was part of any decisions.
the technical director operates All cameras through what they call the switcher...that’s it.
this guy was bragging..
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I didn't say he is part of the decision to take that approach, I said he knows CNN's product, how they cover politics.
I've no idea what you are arguing in the main, that this man is wrong?...CNN didn't emphasis any footage that would show/sell Joe as a sprightly geriatric for example?
It's just all a coincidence, no thinking behind it, simply pure news coverage with no angle.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
From the mailonline:
Chester has no editorial input at CNN, but would witness daily decisions there
'Look what we did, we got Trump out. I am 100 percent going to say it, and I 100 percent believe that if it wasn't for CNN, I don't know that Trump would have got voted out,' Chester said in the video. 'I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that.'
'Like our focus was to get Trump out of office, right? Without saying it, that's what it was, right? So, our next thing is going to be climate change awareness,' Chester said in another clip.
It is unlikely that he would have had editorial input at CNN, or participated in the network's daily editorial calls. But Project Veritas argues that he has unique insights on the editorial culture at CNN, in which he would be immersed daily.
^ That is all I was trying to say, he's senior enough to know the situation, the company's political direction and objectives.
Chester has no editorial input at CNN, but would witness daily decisions there
'Look what we did, we got Trump out. I am 100 percent going to say it, and I 100 percent believe that if it wasn't for CNN, I don't know that Trump would have got voted out,' Chester said in the video. 'I came to CNN because I wanted to be a part of that.'
'Like our focus was to get Trump out of office, right? Without saying it, that's what it was, right? So, our next thing is going to be climate change awareness,' Chester said in another clip.
It is unlikely that he would have had editorial input at CNN, or participated in the network's daily editorial calls. But Project Veritas argues that he has unique insights on the editorial culture at CNN, in which he would be immersed daily.
^ That is all I was trying to say, he's senior enough to know the situation, the company's political direction and objectives.
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
I still fail to see the real issue here (please don't start about virtue again). There is not one cable news outlet that's truly straight down the middle and it's not like CNN, MSNBC or any other "liberal" outlet has been broadcasting subliminal messages that they didn't like Trump. Just like FOX News hasn't done regarding Biden and Harris. The reports were all pretty straightforward, hell they still are.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
The issue or story is one of their own has been caught on camera admitting the bias [which we all knew goes on and with both sides], if Fox's tech director said similar against hillary say in 2016, that they were instrumental in her loss etc.., it would make the news as normally senior people in the media don't go around telling people how their company is biased.
edit: see the battle ground is for the middle as well, a committed liberal or leftist might be all on board for some biased trump bashing, but once you move towards the centre, those people would be more put off by blatant bias. works the same way for Fox probably, blind hatred and bias against Joe would lose some viewers now that he is president, the middle will tend to want him to be given a chance.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
Tucker admitted in court what he says shouldn't be taken serious yet I see him quoted on here on a regular basis. You think he doesn't have an agenda?
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
I think he is more careful on his targets, and will attack republican politicians and their policies too, I don't know of a high profile presenter doing that on the other side, but not to say they don't exist. Hannity who you mentioned before I don't have as much time for, however we seem to be in a bit of a lull atm politically so I haven't watched any Fox shows other than clips posted in here. Once a new republican populist leader emerges things will heat up again I think, depends also on what Joe and the dems do in this term, anything that splits public opinion.Tucker admitted in court what he says shouldn't be taken serious yet I see him quoted on here on a regular basis. You think he doesn't have an agenda?
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Bret Baier Special Report is almost all straight news except for the opinion panel at the end.
Afghanistan Report
Media Bias Report
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
The real issue is recognizing total bullshit when it is staring you in the face.
You where even incapable of reading your own "evidence" of wrongdoing and reason for the right wanting to deflect.
And you still do not see any issue with it!
How are you not embarrassed?
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Joe's on to foreign policy, Good luck everybody.
In other news, the left won the election and control 2 branches of government (Executive Branch, Legislative Branch) but want power of the 3rd branch of government, Judicial, (ie.. the Supreme Court). They want complete power.
(aristocracy)
In other news, the left won the election and control 2 branches of government (Executive Branch, Legislative Branch) but want power of the 3rd branch of government, Judicial, (ie.. the Supreme Court). They want complete power.
(aristocracy)
- Joined
- May 23, 2015
- Location
- Belfast
Joe's on to foreign policy, Good luck everybody.
In other news, the left won the election and control 2 branches of government (Executive Branch, Legislative Branch) but want power of the 3rd branch of government, Judicial, (ie.. the Supreme Court). They want complete power.
(aristocracy)
And how’s that any different to what the right want?
Wasn’t it trump who appointed a SC judge with less than 6 months to the election so that the right would have the upper hand ?
Is it not exactly what the right would do if Trump hadn’t been kicked out by the electorate?
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
The Supreme Court is apolitical. They don't even go to the White House.
The left wants to add 4 more justices, from 9 to 13. That's court packing. I don't think the right ever considered packing the court but you can fact check me.
Amy Coney Barrett recused herself out the Pennsylvania voting case because she was just appointed. (video)
Imagine the case the other way around with 13 justices (4 more liberals) and the left challenged the constitutionality of the Pennsylvania voting, with a left packed court there is a strong chance they would have taken up the case and ruled in the lefts' favor instead of dismissing it.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Same old.
Right majority good, left majority evil.
It was not a power grab when they rushed ACB to the SC, but it is when the left does something to gain majority.
Logic.
"Congress has changed the size of the Court seven times in our nation's history, including five times to add seats to the Court," Eldridge wrote. "The past five times Congress expanded the Supreme Court, it set the number of justices to match the number of circuits in the federal court system. Today, there are 13 circuit courts, and the Judiciary Act follows precedent by increasing the Supreme Court to 13 justices."
Right majority good, left majority evil.
It was not a power grab when they rushed ACB to the SC, but it is when the left does something to gain majority.
Logic.
"Congress has changed the size of the Court seven times in our nation's history, including five times to add seats to the Court," Eldridge wrote. "The past five times Congress expanded the Supreme Court, it set the number of justices to match the number of circuits in the federal court system. Today, there are 13 circuit courts, and the Judiciary Act follows precedent by increasing the Supreme Court to 13 justices."
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
In 1869, Congress set the number of seats to nine, where it has remained until today.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Back then there were 9 circuits in the federal court system, now theres 13.
I know conservatives are not exactly fond of things changing, but wanting things to stay the same as they were back in 1869 might be a bit too conservative imo.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
I deliberately worded it that way because it is not known how the justices will rule when the case(s) are heard.Hearsay, dismissed
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
'Twas but a joke.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Back then there were 9 circuits in the federal court system, now theres 13.
I know conservatives are not exactly fond of things changing, but wanting things to stay the same as they were back in 1869 might be a bit too conservative imo.
Watch Shannon Bream - She's the Supreme Court correspondent for Fox
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Speaking of power grab.
Republicans working on changing voting laws so they can appoint their own election officials sure sounds a bit shady.
Are the election officials not non-partisan in most states? Why would they want to change that so they can appoint their own.
Almost like the failed steal in 2020 made them re-think their efforts for the 2024 election.
Republicans working on changing voting laws so they can appoint their own election officials sure sounds a bit shady.
Are the election officials not non-partisan in most states? Why would they want to change that so they can appoint their own.
Almost like the failed steal in 2020 made them re-think their efforts for the 2024 election.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
Then Ha!
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
They both do, that's why we want to Supreme court to remain as is.Speaking of power grab.
Republicans working on changing voting laws so they can appoint their own election officials sure sounds a bit shady.
Are the election officials not non-partisan in most states? Why would they want to change that so they can appoint their own.
Almost like the failed steal in 2020 made them re-think their efforts for the 2024 election.
If you're talking about Georgia, I'm not sure why that new voter bill the Governor signed took the power to change election rules from the state legislator. When Kemp made the rounds he mentioned it but never explained the rationale behind it. I wish he had. I never heard anything more on it, for or against.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
The 9 are hardly overworked it seems to me, what's Joe and his mendacious cohorts up to?
Trump's three apointees have all turned out to be conservative with a very small 'c', and ironically for dems & liberals, the black judge Thomas is probably the most conservative out of all of them.
Trump's three apointees have all turned out to be conservative with a very small 'c', and ironically for dems & liberals, the black judge Thomas is probably the most conservative out of all of them.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
I skimmed an article a few days ago that i think mentioned 13 states working on bills to do the same, to get the power to appoint their own election officials.
I dont know how it works for each state, but they are mostly not affiliated to any political party i think.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
I think the whole political system in Usa is a bit too complicated and at the same time outdated, and leaves alot of room for misdeeds.
Isnt gerrymandering a bit of an issue? Not talked about as much as other things i guess.
Whats even the purpose of counting it like this?
Is there an upside to have 40% be able to beat 60% that i dont know about?
Isnt gerrymandering a bit of an issue? Not talked about as much as other things i guess.
Whats even the purpose of counting it like this?
Is there an upside to have 40% be able to beat 60% that i dont know about?
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2017
- Location
- Belgium
Oh well.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Location
- USA
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
They have never lost a case. I suspect that they will be backed up to the hilt financially. This will probably become hugely important
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
I guess paying out settlements to settle cases is technically not losing (atleast not in court), but i wouldnt exactly call it winning either.
Imo settling it with money out of court is the same as admitting you wont win in court.
Imo settling it with money out of court is the same as admitting you wont win in court.
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
I agree that it is semantics.
Do you agree that his cases are valid and worth while?
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2019
- Location
- sweden
Dont see him winning a defamation suit vs twitter.
No idea if its valid, using fake accounts sounds like exactly the kind of thing Project veritas would do imo.
- Joined
- May 8, 2018
- Location
- south east england
why does twitter say someone's account is 'suspended' when they mean terminated?
geordiecolin
Sporney eyed parrot faced wazzock
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2015
- Location
- Novacastrian
Because Jack prefers to use gentle language in accord with his gentle nature
