Re: Trump
« Reply #880 on: March 08, 2017, 04:50:33 PM »
What the goose said.  You have no reason to trust Trump, in fact have been given reason after reason after reason not to trust Trump, but your faith in him is secure.  Dave is probably right about you and at this point I would imagine a great deal of his other supporters (mostly the ones who aren't racist pieces of shit and actually voted for him because of his economic policies or whatnot); it's willful ignorance likely caused by a strong desire not to be proven wrong.

You sidestep, sidestep, sidestep when presented with something you don't want to face.  Again, I'd think you were trolling if you weren't doing the same thing most of his other followers are doing (indeed, what Trump himself has been doing since he took office).  It's just sad that 42% of the country is just as unwilling to face fact (actual fact, as opposed to the alternative variety the Trump camp loves) as you are.  And thanks to your blind obedience we have a madman dictating policy in the highest office in this country, and there's nothing that can be done about it because the sackless, ethics-challenged Republicans in Congress are fine looking the other way because so many people like you think he's doing a swell job and take everything he says at face value.

It literally (I mean literally) makes me sick.

What's the alternative? Was I supposed to accept the march towards globalism and socialism just because everyone thinks Trump is a bad person? I don't believe all the hype because I've watched the character assassination unfold in real time over the past year.

Please show me what I have sidestepped, the talking points of the lot of you is no better than those given to you by the AP and Reuters. So scarily close to the "fake news is stuff that trump doesn't like" trope. CNN is fake news. If you're afraid to challenge your own beliefs than please don't click this link to see all the ways that it is.

It is insanely easy to see that most of the media establishment has it out for him. It is insanely easy to see that hypocrisy is the currency of the left. If it wasn't for double standards you would have none at all. Demand evidence for everything Trump says but still wholeheartedly believe that Trump personally ordered Putin to phish John Podesta's emails without a single shred of proof. I've sat here and watched violent protest after violent protest from the supposedly peaceful and tolerant Left. Anti-trump protestors burning free speech signs, macing old men, even busting out the windows of companies that bend over backwards for them. It is terrorism and bigotry, there is no other way to accurately describe what these people are doing.

I don't consider myself a republican or a democrat, or a conservative or a liberal, I just like to believe that common sense still has a place in Government. You can't get everything you want with our rigid two party system, but to me, preservation of our constitutional rights is pretty high on my list. Gorsuch is better than whatever globalist, regressive Justice that the Clinton Cabal would ever appoint. I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court vacancy was a major factor for millions of people when deciding who to vote for.

That being said, I have yet to see any actual evidence or proof of Trump being the evil Fascist people say he is. All his actions indicate a smaller government, there has been no assault on free speech, he hasn't assumed control of the press. He is doing a really terrible job at dictatoring.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #881 on: March 08, 2017, 05:58:57 PM »
WORLD'S GREATEST HEALTHCARE PLAN OF 2017

I have great healthcare. The best!
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Re: Trump
« Reply #882 on: March 08, 2017, 06:21:42 PM »
WORLD'S GREATEST HEALTHCARE PLAN OF 2017

I have great healthcare. The best!

TROLL LEVELS REACHING MAXIMUM


Re: Trump
« Reply #883 on: March 08, 2017, 06:29:35 PM »
If you're afraid to challenge your own beliefs than please don't click this link to see all the ways that it is.

*click*

Oh joy, The_Donald.

No, no, Trekky. Let's give it a chance. Maybe CNN really is a lying piece of shit.

OK, OK, fine.

Quote
1. CNN Repeatedly Claims George Bush Sr. Signed NAFTA. It was Bill Clinton

Quote
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 among the three nations, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992.

Wow. Such lies.

And yes, I know. Bill Clinton did sign the ratification of NAFTA after it passed through Congress. But George H. W. Bush did sign NAFTA in December of 1992.

Re: Trump
« Reply #884 on: March 08, 2017, 06:33:30 PM »
If you're afraid to challenge your own beliefs than please don't click this link to see all the ways that it is.

*click*

Oh joy, The_Donald.

No, no, Trekky. Let's give it a chance. Maybe CNN really is a lying piece of shit.

OK, OK, fine.

Quote
1. CNN Repeatedly Claims George Bush Sr. Signed NAFTA. It was Bill Clinton

Quote
Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 among the three nations, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican President Carlos Salinas signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992.

Wow. Such lies.

And yes, I know. Bill Clinton did sign the ratification of NAFTA after it passed through Congress. But George H. W. Bush did sign NAFTA in December of 1992.

Technically Clinton signed it into law, but please, continue on.

Re: Trump
« Reply #885 on: March 08, 2017, 07:03:06 PM »
i hope julian assange one day dies in prison.  https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/290293

also, that cnn list is pathetic.  of the first half dozen or so, this one is my favorite.  so cnn is fake news because anderson cooper got a fact wrong...reported 23 months prior...by cnn.  lol.  i guess cnn was having technical issues with its "create a technical issue anytime anyone says anything bad about hillary clinton" button that day?
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Re: Trump
« Reply #886 on: March 08, 2017, 07:19:54 PM »
i hope julian assange one day dies in prison.  https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/290293

also, that cnn list is pathetic.  of the first half dozen or so, this one is my favorite.  so cnn is fake news because anderson cooper got a fact wrong...reported 23 months prior...by cnn.  lol.  i guess cnn was having technical issues with its "create a technical issue anytime anyone says anything bad about hillary clinton" button that day?

How many unflattering facts can they deny, misrepresent, or misreport before you see a pattern in the selection. You don't have to outright lie if you could just keep misreporting and write a correction three days later, after the article gets shared thousands of times of course.

If anyone think CNN is unbiased then I can not literally take anything they say seriously from this point forward. Goes for Fox News too.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3347
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #887 on: March 08, 2017, 07:27:50 PM »
Also, at least one of those examples relies on taking the headlines of a couple of articles out of context - this article is talking about hacking voting machines, while this article makes it clear that what Russia (allegedly) hacked was the DNC, not the voting machines themselves. It also cites dubious conspiracy theories with no real evidence backing them up, like CNN supposedly cutting a reporter off for mentioning that Hillary supported the Crime Control Act of 1994, and most of the cases in which they really did report genuine factual errors don't seem to be anything more than simple mistakes - ones they retracted and corrected, as good news outlets do. This isn't the damning indictment you're making it out to be.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #888 on: March 08, 2017, 07:58:08 PM »
((sigh... I had up to part 6 and my browser crashed))

So I'm gonna go through 1-10 of your link and see how they measure up against Truth.

1. Nope, Bush Sr. actually signed NAFTA.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/08/13/trump-wrong-nafta-bill-clintons-creation.html
Here's a pic even.
NAFTA started with Ronald Regan and Bush Sr. signed the actual agreement in December of 1992.  In 1993, Bill Clinton became president and the agreement had to go through Congress, which was put into US law in 1993.  Basically Bush Sr. made NAFTA, signed it, and then the US made it law a year later.  In a way both are right, but Clinton didn't have much to do with the actual agreement aside from implementing it in the US.

2. Misleading.  Here's the full quote:
As part of her handling of the case, Clinton filed an affidavit July 28, 1975, requesting that the girl go through a psychiatric examination. “I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing,” Clinton said. “I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”
As a court appointed lawyer to a rapist, she had to do her best to represent him.  It's the law.  And she did.  It was horrible but she did.  Those quotes were from her requesting a psych eval of the 12 year old.  Again, part of her job.

3. I can't comment much since I don't work for CNN IT but it IS something that happens.  However, if she was cut off due to saying something bad, why would she have been kept on staff AND promoted after the election?

4. http://www.omaha.com/news/metro/crowd-at-hillary-clinton-s-omaha-rally-exceeded-with-overflow/article_0c8bc1b0-5946-11e6-abf7-6f6f26e598bf.html
Overflow room.  Cause the gym had a maximum capacity.  And the article above is from the local paper.  Unless you think that's also "fake news".

5. The timestamp of that live show was 3 hours after the gas dropped.  CNN reported on it that day at some point.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2016/08/02/syria-gas-attack-damon-lok.cnn
Check the date.  August 2nd.  The same day the gas dropped.  So unless Fox news just kept playing the same video on a loop while saying the same thing for hours on end and that's good, this point is full of failure.

6. The title was to illustrate Trump going from courting black voters to talking about felons not being allowed to vote.  Blacks are disproportionately convicted of crimes in the US more than any other race.  Thus, it's almost hypocritical to try to court the black vote while also attacking the idea of allowing convicted felons who served their time ,which has more blacks proportionally than any other group.  Kinda like saying "Republicans should vote for me but welfare is shit and needs to be killed" since more Republicans are on welfare in some states than Democrats.

7. Yeah and several fox news networks picked up the story that CNN posted.  And according to this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3734646/Secret-Service-says-didn-t-formally-approach-Trump-Campaign-Second-Amendment-death-threats.html
There was no "formal" talks but informal is a possibility.  So the CNN report may have been accurate.

8. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/29/cnn-edits-donald-trump-tweet-referencing-crooked-h/
Yep, they didn't show it in the TV spot but did on the website then said they should have done it right on the TV. 

9. It's not CNN but a sister company owned by CNN.  So misleading there.
And yes, they did blur out the re-aired (the live broadcast had it non-blurred) version.  They said it was an error but personally, I'm glad they did.  No sense in getting political.  If he had a Clinton shirt, they should have blurred it too.  After all, why would you care about his opinion on political parties if you're telling a story of how he saved a life?  Also, he was a jackass for wanting to make a political statement while talking about saving a baby's life. Tell the facts, don't get political!

10. If you read the actual transcript of the show that the guy cuts off, you'll find that Howard Stern didn't say anything but they got the tapes from his show and Trump was on it and he said he was for the war.  The tape is what it is.  So in a way, Howard Stern confirmed it, but in 2002, not now.


So first ten and they're (at best) misleading (likely unintentionally).

As was said, this isn't some kind of explosive proof, it's more like luke warm coffee.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #889 on: March 08, 2017, 09:52:00 PM »


About this;

I have yet to see any actual evidence or proof of Trump being the evil Fascist people say he is. There has been no assault on free speech.

During his first week in office, Trump launched orders to gag scientists in Federal Agencies, hit the EPA with a freeze on all contracts and grants, staff were barred from updating its social media accounts  and told not to talk to the press without clearance. The department of the interior's twitter account were shut down, the department of health and human services was ordered not to communicate with external officials, including members of congress.

You sure about that statement Truth?
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

Re: Trump
« Reply #890 on: March 08, 2017, 10:16:14 PM »
...If you're afraid to challenge your own beliefs than please don't click this link to see all the ways that it is.
...

/r/The_Donald? Lol. Well, that explains a lot. Others have already addressed the specific items on the list, so I'll address the source. Look at the list of rules for /r/The_Donald:

Quote
...
vi. This is a forum for supporters of Trump ONLY
...

It's an echo chamber, by design. Never trust information from an echo chamber. If you are going to get your info from reddit, at least find a sub that allows dissenting opinions. Otherwise, you are just volunteering yourself to be brainwashed.

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #891 on: March 08, 2017, 11:11:21 PM »
What the goose said.  You have no reason to trust Trump, in fact have been given reason after reason after reason not to trust Trump, but your faith in him is secure.  Dave is probably right about you and at this point I would imagine a great deal of his other supporters (mostly the ones who aren't racist pieces of shit and actually voted for him because of his economic policies or whatnot); it's willful ignorance likely caused by a strong desire not to be proven wrong.

You sidestep, sidestep, sidestep when presented with something you don't want to face.  Again, I'd think you were trolling if you weren't doing the same thing most of his other followers are doing (indeed, what Trump himself has been doing since he took office).  It's just sad that 42% of the country is just as unwilling to face fact (actual fact, as opposed to the alternative variety the Trump camp loves) as you are.  And thanks to your blind obedience we have a madman dictating policy in the highest office in this country, and there's nothing that can be done about it because the sackless, ethics-challenged Republicans in Congress are fine looking the other way because so many people like you think he's doing a swell job and take everything he says at face value.

It literally (I mean literally) makes me sick.

What's the alternative? Was I supposed to accept the march towards globalism and socialism just because everyone thinks Trump is a bad person? I don't believe all the hype because I've watched the character assassination unfold in real time over the past year.

The alternative is to be just as vocal about the multitude of terrible things Trump has done in his first 40 days as president as you have been about the multitude of shitty things HRC did.

Quote
Please show me what I have sidestepped, the talking points of the lot of you is no better than those given to you by the AP and Reuters. So scarily close to the "fake news is stuff that trump doesn't like" trope. CNN is fake news. If you're afraid to challenge your own beliefs than please don't click this link to see all the ways that it is.

It is insanely easy to see that most of the media establishment has it out for him. It is insanely easy to see that hypocrisy is the currency of the left. If it wasn't for double standards you would have none at all. Demand evidence for everything Trump says but still wholeheartedly believe that Trump personally ordered Putin to phish John Podesta's emails without a single shred of proof. I've sat here and watched violent protest after violent protest from the supposedly peaceful and tolerant Left. Anti-trump protestors burning free speech signs, macing old men, even busting out the windows of companies that bend over backwards for them. It is terrorism and bigotry, there is no other way to accurately describe what these people are doing.

The actual journalists on Fox News are also out to get Trump and on the same things I think are reasonable to go after him for: wasting time Shitposting on Twitter; complaining about HRC's private email server, then using one; talking about National Security as a crowd of onlookers crowd his sweet patio table at his sweet golf club; wracking up more in travel in 40 days than Obama did in in almost a year; making serious allegations on a wide range of topics without a shred of evidence (coinciding with Twitter shitposting), etc...

Quote
I don't consider myself a republican or a democrat, or a conservative or a liberal, I just like to believe that common sense still has a place in Government. You can't get everything you want with our rigid two party system, but to me, preservation of our constitutional rights is pretty high on my list. Gorsuch is better than whatever globalist, regressive Justice that the Clinton Cabal would ever appoint. I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court vacancy was a major factor for millions of people when deciding who to vote for.

His candidate was surprisingly centrist and everyone has been onside with that.

Quote
That being said, I have yet to see any actual evidence or proof of Trump being the evil Fascist people say he is.

He isn't. Pence probably is. After all, he literally tried to start an Indiana public news outlet whose express purpose was to propagandize against the free press. The locking out of media from press junkets is pretty petty, and if it becomes habit, then that is a black mark against him, however you feel about CNN, et al.

Quote
All his actions indicate a smaller government, there has been no assault on free speech, he hasn't assumed control of the press. He is doing a really terrible job at dictatoring.

He is trying to limit the press contact to the people he approves of (see agree with him) That is definitely strongly on the fascist spectrum but that alone does not make him #literallyhitler. He is what I thought he'd be, a narcissistic populist who has zero idea about foreign policy and doesn't appear to care to learn.

Re: Trump
« Reply #892 on: March 08, 2017, 11:24:11 PM »
How many unflattering facts can they deny, misrepresent, or misreport before you see a pattern in the selection. You don't have to outright lie if you could just keep misreporting and write a correction three days later, after the article gets shared thousands of times of course.
 

you haven't demonstrated a pattern of anything.  i concede that news agencies make errors and have technical malfunctions.  showing me a short list of some of them doesn't convince me that cnn makes up all the facts that they report or serve the agenda of some liberal cabal.

and of course cnn is left-of-center.  but everyone kinda already knows that, including the left.  i don't know any humans who get their news from just one agency, let alone exclusively from cnn.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #893 on: March 09, 2017, 07:30:37 AM »
i don't know any humans who get their news from just one agency, let alone exclusively from cnn.
You're lucky, then. Most people I know (on both sides of the spectrum) tend to get their news from one agency. Obviously it won't be completely exclusive, but there often is an overwhelming trend.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #894 on: March 09, 2017, 12:14:20 PM »
i don't know any humans who get their news from just one agency, let alone exclusively from cnn.
You're lucky, then. Most people I know (on both sides of the spectrum) tend to get their news from one agency. Obviously it won't be completely exclusive, but there often is an overwhelming trend.

Same here, and most people I know get a significant portion of their news from social media, mostly in headline form.


*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #896 on: March 09, 2017, 01:30:28 PM »
I read NPR.  It's as centralist as the AP plus it has way less banner ads and click bait.

(have you ever SEEN fox news's site?  Ugh...)
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7653
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #897 on: March 09, 2017, 04:41:12 PM »
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/08/519247480/china-okays-38-trump-trademarks-critics-say-it-violates-emoluments-clause

This has nothing to do with Trump being the president.
Nope.

China did it because he's a swell business man.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Trump
« Reply #898 on: March 10, 2017, 03:40:59 AM »
You're lucky, then. Most people I know (on both sides of the spectrum) tend to get their news from one agency. Obviously it won't be completely exclusive, but there often is an overwhelming trend.

76% of Americans usually turn to the same source of news, and those that go to the same source for news are more likely to think news is good at informing people. Those that are not loyal to a news service are less likely to think news is good at informing people.

points taken, although we may be saying basically the same thing.  don't mean to imply that most folks give equal weight to a wide variety of news agencies.  but i would expect most of the folks watching cnn to also be sometimes watching msnbc, listening to npr, reading major newspapers and news aggregators, etc.  i just figure that the ubiquity of news media in general makes it pretty difficult to be so selective.  i could be wrong tho.

fwiw i'm genuinely equally dismissive of the notion of 'people who only read breitbart.'  maybe they're loyal to breitbart, but surely they're exposed to other sources on a pretty regular basis.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

Re: Trump
« Reply #899 on: March 10, 2017, 02:31:05 PM »
The problem isn't with watching only one or two networks, it's watching them and not understanding that they are biased. Some people still have some insane notion that infotainment companies like CNN and Fox are beholden to any kind of ethical code. I literally have people on my feed everyday who actually think the CNN and Wapo take on topics is the fair balanced view.

My thing is this, since our president already called them out many times, and banned them from the press conferences, why would they have any reason to play nice? To think, if they were fair or balanced before that (they weren't) how much worse they are after all that.